Mueller Report Brings Into Focus Obama's Attempted Coup Against Trump

16 minutes ago, 6ACFC0 said:

Kirkman, apparently you cant read or have an inability to understand.  Where did I ask you to apologize for anything? 

Lets try to make this simple so you can hopefully understand.  You wont respond to any legitimate point other than to ignore it and post some pictures.  For example what was you response to all the Trump administration lies???  It is a legitimate point and you simply wont engage because I guess you dont want to admit it.  Instead you posted a pic of a girl drinking beer. 

Im waiting for your witty response and pics...

Ban Kirkman from this site please.

 

I think we have all figured out till now that you don't like Tom and now we can move on. According to our guidelines Tom didn't break any rules unlike you. If you can't move on with reasonable discussion without insulting other members, you will be banned from this forum. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a retired Baptist pastor in the Midwest, but long ago worked the oil fields of the Permian Basin. I have been following development in oil since the oil crisis of the 70's. I am not an expert at all but I am a fairly astute observers of things, I hope. As for the oil market, I have found that for myself, it is the most manipulated market that ever existed. There simply is no rationale for the pricing of oil -- except extracting as much profit as possible. My observations convince me that the notion of supply and demand ruling the process is a joke, existing only on the pages of old textbooks. 

From the perspective of a consumer of an oil product, gasoline, I find no rational connection between what I pay for gas and what the price of crude is. It is to me all completely artificially manufactured, with a myriad of influences like holiday pricing, weekend pricing, neighborhood pricing, and just plain old greed pricing simply because they can. When oil was at $48 dollars a barrel, gasoline ranged from $1.85 to - gulp - $2.89. The algorithm blows your mind! 

But I watch this and other sites with interest to at least recognize when oil is being manipulated to an extreme degree. And right now, April 23, it is at its height, with news about blocking nations from trading with Iran seemingly justifying raising the price of crude despite an admitted world glut of oil. Let's say I come to this site with a skeptical eye, noticing the Russian author here, for instance. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Okie said:

What do you mean by Administrative State?  This is another term that I do not understand.  Can you define it?  The area of law that I practice is (a body of) Administrative Law, and I am curious if you are using that term in a similar manner.  This is a serious question, Ron.  I am not trying to be insulting.  In logic, there is a logical fallacy called "equivocation."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation

Sometimes words have two meanings and it could be you are using it in a different way than how I understand it.

Government workers now have better pay AND far better benefits than most middle class workers.

Actually, the U.S. government has a legal duty to pay at the rate of "best employer" practices.  They talk about this endlessly on FedSmith.com (believe it or not, I am actually acquainted with the owners of the website).  It is also discussed quite a bit on GovExec.com.  The short of it is that U.S. Government employees at the lower pay grades are paid more than their private sector counterparts; and people like me (attorneys) are paid less working for the government than their counterparts in the private sector (among larger employers).  It is for this reason that the U.S. Government has a difficult time hiring computer programmers and engineers, who can make a lot more in the private sector.  In some cases, some $30,000 per year more.  It is this argument that you are making which has prevented them from taking steps to rectify the pay gap among certain critical skill sets. 

Another point is that because the U.S. Government hires so many professionals (like lawyers and doctors, for instance) that it skews the pay scale "on average."

But your point raises a much larger question about income and wealth disparity in society as a whole, which has been discussed by "leftist" writers, which you seem to hate.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/06/the-hoarding-of-the-american-dream/530481/

Ok, I’ll bite.  You’ve asked more than once now for posters to identify what their perception of the “deep state” and now what the “administrative state”, is.  For most, the terms are synonymous. The deeply partisan and activist career employees of the federal government.  Those persons who enter government service and do not find themselves looking for employment upon the change that comes with election cycles every four or eight years.  It means the folks you and I at one time would have defined as the bureaucracy, that is line or low level federal employees.  Unfortunately, increasingly it better describes high ranking appointees, holdovers and the recurring names and faces of folks who just don’t go away whether it be because of their experience, influence or otherwise.  Names like Brennan, Clapper, Comey and  Strzock come to mind but suffice it to say there are many unknown names behind the scenes who agree with the aforementioned and would/will do their bidding no matter how wrongheaded.   I offer the shenanigans of the FISA warrant, the dirty details of which aren’t yet fully exposed in example and all the persons and organizations that were targeted and mistreated by the IRS during the Obozo Administration because they were conservative, such as the Tea Party and their affiliates.  What was hatched out above was carried out by those willing to do wrong, below.  Just two quick examples of many available.  

The difference between the non-malignant bureaucracy of yesterday and the deep-state of today, if you please, is now, many of these career government employees have become emboldened to act out or against others in their official capacity.  This term, to me, best describes appointed persons who both overtly and covertly act out with ever increasing malicious intent toward anyone they don’t agree with.  Where the bureaucracy used to honorably go about fulfilling their duties faithfully, checking their politics and ideology at the office door daily, to serve Americans and American interest; the deep state both individually and collectively, perhaps illegally (story unfolding) works against the mission and goals of the current administration because personally/politically/ideologically they don’t agree with it.  This likely transcends President Trump and could just as effectively describe malice practiced towards conservatives.  Party/ideology over right and wrong and instead of service to others paramount, blatant partisanship replaces that.

Vestiges of the bureaucracy of old still exist, I know this.  Good women and men come and go to work everyday and serve no matter who they are serving because they are serving Americans not D’s, R’s I’s, etc.  Unfortunately, their work is overshadowed by bad actors, usually in places of authority, who do much more harm than good.  Their authority level and influence complement their mal-intent and also affect the actions of those below them and for the wrong reasons.  As an added bonus for lower-level members of the deep or administrative state, it’s damn near impossible to fire them.  This particular morsel is why folks like me don’t fret when the government “shuts down” except for truly essential services, which is what government should be providing.  That’s another discussion however.

Pay disparity between government service and private sector employment is elementary and for many years, government employees served not for hopes of financial enrichment but because a decent wage, decent retirement benefits and personal satisfaction were personally rewarding while serving others.  Private for profit employment in general terms is service of self.  Obviously there are some professions that step outside this generalization.  One need only look at what private sector CEO’s make.  Point being, many government employees are talented enough and could have gone into myriad other professions or made different choices within their current profession and made tons more money.  I assume service to others or a unselfish cause drew then in and the rewards of serving others no matter how intangible, keeps them in.  

The taxpayer understands  and wants a trade off between necessary, capable, dedicated public servants the cost of employing them and rewarding them after retirement.  It goes without saying that taxpayers, especially those unemployed or underemployed often through no fault of their own, get a little mift when they see government employees who don’t give a damn about customer service being paid and retiring significantly better for their less than servant-like labors.  This is compounded when it gets out that some of these government employees, deep staters, use their position to do wrong.

Our friend @Jan van Eck often shares strong opinions about government bureaucrats.  I’d like to disagree with his characterizations of them but often can’t.  

By the way, for government employees that go to work everyday to truly serve others as opposed to personal ideologies or politics or those of someone in authority over you, thank you.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 4/21/2019 at 10:40 PM, Mark Bahner said:

I imagine he was probably pretty upset by what Trump said at the Helsinki Summit:

No. (Re)-read my first post.

 

15 hours ago, Mark Bahner said:

Speaking of Kodak moments, how about Donald Trump declaring his love for Kim Jong Un, like a blushing bride-to-be? (That orange color is his form of blushing, right?)

Psychological warfare. Trump has modified Chinese behavior in the South China Sea and N. Korea continual testing of weapons. Compare this to how Obama was walked all over by: China in South China Sea, N. Korea testing weapons left and right and how Assad did it in Syria (remember Obama's red line?). 

 

15 hours ago, Mark Bahner said:

Or how about the moment when he declared that John McCain wasn't a war hero, because John McCain was a prisoner of war? So much for all the men who spent time at the Hanoi Hilton...while Trump was in whatever Hilton he was in! Because going to war is for idiots, right? Smart people don't go to war, just like they don't pay taxes, right?

Sadly, McCain in his last 20 years aligned himself with Sunni Jihadists worldwide. That is treason in my eyes.

Edited by shadowkin
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, tldpdb1 said:

ZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzZzzzzzz....Oil price Delete this whole thread please!

The only thing I got from this post was an image of someone with their fingers in their ears and stomping their feet on the ground.

  • Haha 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/15/2019 at 3:43 AM, Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas said:

I wish Trump good luck negotiating with China, but honestly, I don't see any way to make a reliable, binding deal with China as long as China remains a one-party authoritarian/totalitarian state.  Fundamentally, marxist/communist and quasi marxist/communist countries simply do not respect private property rights.  Making deals/contracts with them will not change the basic tenets of marxism.

I've been saying this for years, China does what China wants and be damned anyone that makes any comments about the unfair trade practices that go on in China. If they get penalized, they just move things around to different countries and sell it through them.. "China does what China wants!" The only problem is that the companies that took manufacturing over there would pay a steep price now that they have invested so heavily in a country that could very easily come out tomorrow and just take everything for themselves. International courts are great for suing China, but who can actually make them pay? I can't believe anyone would invest in manufacturing over there, must have had dollar signs clouding their vision.

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/17/2019 at 7:12 AM, 6ACFC0 said:

Just what I thought - for some reason Trump followers will ignore all of the lies by Trump and everyone around him.  Instead they point to "fake news" as an excuse.  Think about this really hard, which may be difficult for you to do - but please try.  People do not lie without a reason.  Ask yourself why Trump lies so much.  If Trump and gang are innocent why would you expose yourself to criminal prosecution with lies?   

You are certainly entitled to ignore this and bury your head in the sand if you would like.  But thank you Mr Kirkman for proving my point - you are a fine example of the absurd logic used by Trump followers.       

And yet it was OK when the Obama fools were making excuses for him and Hilliary's escapades and making excuses for them. How can people be so ignorant? Everyone acts like Trump is the ONLY president that has had some type of nefarious dealings. Sorry JR, Trump is just the end of a long list of names that has done exactly what the Demo's are crying about right now, but the funniest part of the whole deal is the Demo's actually seem to have stepped on their own toes with the Mueller affair. It seems that they have been involved in a LOT of back room deals that were illegal, like letting Hilliary get away with doing e-mails on a personal unprotected computer? Now we need Mueller to get into that one and see where it leads. Quit your whining and try to do something constructive for a change. All you Demo's seem to be the same now, a bunch of whiners and complainers.

  • Great Response! 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Obama lied and that means we should ignore Trump lies?  That logic is not going to win a lot of arguments.  Neither are acceptable. 

The problem is Obama the liar is not the President and Liar Trump is the president.  So if you were outraged by the Obama lies why are you not outraged by Trump lies?????  And I might add that Trump lies are far more numerous and obvious.     

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 6ACFC0 said:

So if you were outraged by the Obama lies why are you not outraged by Trump lies?????  And I might add that Trump lies are far more numerous and obvious.  

The reason large numbers of folks do not get outraged are, in part, as follows:

1.  Mr. Trump has gone where no man has gone before.  He is prepared to upset the apple cart.  Hillary, when asked if she would ever consent to meeting with the North Koreans, snapped:  "I shall not lower the dignity of the Presidency."  OK, so with that attitude you never unravel the Gordian Knot, and you keep war tensions boiling on the Korean Peninsula.  Trump, to his credit, tossed aside all that rubbish and went straight out for meetings with Kim, with the specific intention of nudging N. Korea back into the family of nations.  Right now nobody is blasting off rockets, nobody is sinking South Korean patrol boats, and nobody is sabotaging the DMZ.   Who had the better approach:  Hillary or Donald?  You tell me. 

2.  Mr. Trump was prepared to put his foot down on the Steel Dumping that had wrecked the US steel industry.  Once that 25% tariff hit,  basic steel started a recovery, and at least one large plant was re-started in Ohio.  Now, that is good news for American production.  Nobody else was prepared to do that, especially the politicians of the Democratic Party.  

3.   Mr. Trump put his foot down also on basic aluminum.  That tariff at 10% was less effective, but then again, dumped aluminum,while disappointing, was hurting US cast aluminum. 

4.  Mr. Trump clamped down on Canadian softwood dumping into the US market.  He hit that with a hefty duty, I forget the amount.  The effect was to reduce Canadian grabbing of US market share, shifting production to US woodlots.  Was that a good or a bad thing?  Depends; for home builders, it put their costs up.  For US lumberjacks and sawmills, it put them back to work.  At lest he made the move, signalling to Ottawa that this was a serious problem and it had to go back onto the negotiating table, along with NAFTA and the Auto Pact.  Now, you can argue that his actions are impulsive and not thought out, but at least he forces the issue.  Others let it slide, to the US loss. 

5.   As to the obvious lies  ("I had the biggest turnout at an inauguration ever!"), everybody knows that is an ego-boost fib.  In all candor, nobody much cares.  Mr. Trump got elected in very large part because the public recognized that the Democrats in general and the Clintonites in particular took the voters for granted, scorned the voters, and abused the voters.  What you have here is a public that is saying: "Stick it in your ear, Washington."  It is Ross Perot written extra large.  Do I care if he cheats at golf?  No, I don't care.  It is not even interesting. I do care that he is screwing up the relationship with the Europeans, but then again, that is a function of the mono-culture so prevalent in the USA.  Europe will survive it.  But in the meantime, Americans are getting back to work.  And Americans rather like that.  

And, since this is an Oil Forum, what does that posture mean for the oil industry?  Well, it means that oil will be granted lassitude and lassitudes that it would not be granted under a Democratic Administration, including various drilling permits and pipeline programs.  It is not an issue of whether that is a good thing or a bad thing; it is an issue of making it happen.  And Americans like that, so it is happening.  Cheers. 

  • Like 3
  • Great Response! 2
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Okie said:

What do you mean by Administrative State?  This is another term that I do not understand.  Can you define it?  The area of law that I practice is (a body of) Administrative Law, and I am curious if you are using that term in a similar manner.  This is a serious question, Ron.  I am not trying to be insulting.  In logic, there is a logical fallacy called "equivocation."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation

Sometimes words have two meanings and it could be you are using it in a different way than how I understand it.

Government workers now have better pay AND far better benefits than most middle class workers.

Actually, the U.S. government has a legal duty to pay at the rate of "best employer" practices.  They talk about this endlessly on FedSmith.com (believe it or not, I am actually acquainted with the owners of the website).  It is also discussed quite a bit on GovExec.com.  The short of it is that U.S. Government employees at the lower pay grades are paid more than their private sector counterparts; and people like me (attorneys) are paid less working for the government than their counterparts in the private sector (among larger employers).  It is for this reason that the U.S. Government has a difficult time hiring computer programmers and engineers, who can make a lot more in the private sector.  In some cases, some $30,000 per year more.  It is this argument that you are making which has prevented them from taking steps to rectify the pay gap among certain critical skill sets. 

Another point is that because the U.S. Government hires so many professionals (like lawyers and doctors, for instance) that it skews the pay scale "on average."

But your point raises a much larger question about income and wealth disparity in society as a whole, which has been discussed by "leftist" writers, which you seem to hate.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/06/the-hoarding-of-the-american-dream/530481/

So, you seem to deny that government employee salaries and benefits have not grown steadily over the last few decades. IMHO that is the greatest cause of disparity of income and political influence. Politicians have bought votes indirectly by meeting the demands of government unions. Government unions were illegal up until the Kennedy Administration. They were illegal for that very reason, which was to keep them from influencing politics and expanding their pay and benefits as politicians themselves have. 

Exorbitant pay and benefits are a real and present danger to many states, counties, and cities. Chicago is presently the best example, but it controls Illinois politics and is dragging Illinois down with it. NYC has already been through this scenario. Many more should be in the news. 

Regarding highly technical jobs. You cannot give the lower level employees high pay and expect to be able to offer highly educated and talented people the requisite salary needed to attract them also. San Francisco is presently paying high salaries and benefits to people qualified to gather up human excrement off their sidewalks. I believe it is over $40,000 plus usual city benefits. I imagine the federal government has many jobs requiring little skill but paying high salaries. 

Congressmen have low salaries but receive a pension for life after serving as little as one two year term. (My understanding). Some local congressmen refuse to accept it because it is so exorbitant. 

I don't hate anyone. I am a Christian. I do disagree with socialism, communism, racism, totalitarianism, etc. I stand by the American Constitution and will fight anyone who attempts to subvert it as it is plainly written. Most government employees have taken an oath to defend the Constitution, but I am skeptical that many realize the gravity of that oath and would actually fight to uphold it. 

We have people who do not want to secure our borders but would allow illegal aliens the right to vote. This is no time to be meek and mild about the problems we face. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, TXPower said:

Our friend @Jan van Eck often shares strong opinions about government bureaucrats.  I’d like to disagree with his characterizations of them but often can’t.  

Tex, I have no quarrel with the legions of worker-bees that trudge in to the office each morning to process social-security payments, deal with Medicare,  struggle with the wounded at the Veteran's Hospitals, go out and contend with forest fires, that sort of thing.  What irks me immensely are those authoritarians that abuse their office to wreak hurt and harm upon ordinary people, for no other reason than personal aggrandizement.  And unfortunately, there are a disproportionate number of those bureaucrats out there.  Should those be fired?  You bet. 

  • Like 2
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 6ACFC0 said:

So Obama lied and that means we should ignore Trump lies?  That logic is not going to win a lot of arguments.  Neither are acceptable. 

The problem is Obama the liar is not the President and Liar Trump is the president.  So if you were outraged by the Obama lies why are you not outraged by Trump lies?????  And I might add that Trump lies are far more numerous and obvious.     

Please inform yourself by reading Part Two of the Obama Administration Scandals 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/11axnqv_b3L2k9CD6HWNMwrdIECJZSxowxjO4RIc-rbE/edit

There is no comparison. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2019 at 11:35 PM, ronwagn said:

So, you seem to deny that government employee salaries and benefits have not grown steadily over the last few decades.

They have grown at less than the rate of inflation.  However, I do not know how they have done relative to the private sector (although federal wages are supposed to mirror wages in private sector among large companies).

On 4/23/2019 at 11:35 PM, ronwagn said:

Government unions were illegal up until the Kennedy Administration. They were illegal for that very reason, which was to keep them from influencing politics and expanding their pay and benefits as politicians themselves have.

Your proposal is almost certainly unconstitutional (right to peaceably assemble, right to contract, right to speech, etc.).  Another misconception you have is that neither federal employees nor their unions are allowed to negotiate their wages, which puts them in a far weaker bargaining position.  Right now, it is leading to exploitation by management.  All you would be doing with your proposal is shift the balance of power in favor of management.

On 4/23/2019 at 11:35 PM, ronwagn said:

Exorbitant pay and benefits are a real and present danger to many states, counties, and cities. Chicago is presently the best example, but it controls Illinois politics and is dragging Illinois down with it. NYC has already been through this scenario. Many more should be in the news. 

Illinois (or any other state), does not print its own currency, which is why states should be limited in how much they can borrow relative to their gross domestic product.  However, many pension funds were based on unrealistic stock market returns and 2008-2009 brought those back to earth (that's why many of them are in trouble).  Incidentally, Social Security's trust fund is now more solvent than last year due to the growing economy.  https://www.ssa.gov/oact/TRSUM/

On 4/23/2019 at 11:35 PM, ronwagn said:

You cannot give the lower level employees high pay and expect to be able to offer highly educated and talented people the requisite salary needed to attract them also.

Actually, you can.  All labor is underpaid in the United States.  Probably the world, actually.

On 4/23/2019 at 11:35 PM, ronwagn said:

San Francisco is presently paying high salaries and benefits to people qualified to gather up human excrement off their sidewalks. I believe it is over $40,000 plus usual city benefits.

$40,000 in San Francisco is paltry.  Do you know how much it costs to live in a studio apartment there?  After taxes, that is probably not even a subsistence wage for that locality.  That might be a good wage for a small town in the Midwest where you (and I) live, but not in San Francisco.

On 4/23/2019 at 11:35 PM, ronwagn said:

I do disagree with socialism, communism, racism,

First you said this...  Then you said this:

On 4/23/2019 at 11:35 PM, ronwagn said:

We have people who do not want to secure our borders but would allow illegal aliens the right to vote.

 

From a legal perspective, people who come here without first applying for a visa are "undocumented" not "illegal."  That is particularly true of people who come here seeking asylum, which we are required to process due to treaty obligations and international law (yes, there really is such a thing -- it was my main area of study in law school).  https://cmsny.org/publications/barsky-us-legal-responsibilities-asylum-seekers/

Most of the undocumented aliens end up on farms picking apples or watermelons.  It is backbreaking work in often terrible conditions.  And right now, we can afford them and need them.

You say you are a Christian.  Well, here is something Jesus said:

35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

So where is the Christian message in trying to keep refugees out?   Especially as we have the power to help them.  I see a patent inconsistency in your Christianity.

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Please inform yourself by reading Part Two of the Obama Administration Scandals 

 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/11axnqv_b3L2k9CD6HWNMwrdIECJZSxowxjO4RIc-rbE/edit

There is no comparison. 

You sent me to a site that spouts more right wing rhetoric without a reputable source?  Sorry I am not going to go thru all of the articles in your link without a reputable source.   

Again, you choose to avoid answering the simple question of why any of you are not outraged by Trump lies.  So again my point is proven - none of you want to have a serious discussion.  You just post links and pics to answer questions.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 6ACFC0 said:

Again, you choose to avoid answering the simple question of why any of you are not outraged by Trump lies.  So again my point is proven - none of you want to have a serious discussion.  You just post links and pics to answer questions.

I am perfectly happy to "have a serious discussion."  I do not, typically, post either links or pictures - unless it is an actual photo of an object under discussion, such as that rogue oil tanker that ran aground off Syria. 

Is the American public "outraged" by Trump lies?  Not really.  Most just shrug it off as rather immature behavior.  Then again, lots of politicians are immature. To say that only Republicans are immature is not credible.  I invite you to review the conduct of Anthony Weiner, a Member of Congress representing New York City (part of it).   He was busy sending lewd pictures of his sex organs, in erect, aroused posture,  to women he had never met, typically quite young.  After being outed for that, he kept it up and continued to do "sexting" to young women.  Ultimately his wife, a Clinton top associate, divorced him.  He still kept it up.  To quote from Wikipedia:

     "Following a report from the Daily Mail in September 2016, the FBI investigated Weiner for sexting with a 15-year-old girl. His laptop was seized and emails related to the Hillary Clinton email controversy were found on it, causing a controversy late in the presidential election. On May 19, 2017, Weiner pled guilty to one count of transferring obscene material to a minor. His wife, Huma Abedin, filed for divorce prior to Weiner's guilty plea. In September, he was sentenced to 21 months in federal prison. He served his sentence at Federal Medical Center, Devens, in Ayer, Massachusetts."

Now you can argue that this is mentally-ill behaviour, if you like, or you can say that he is a narcissist, and immature, and engaging in anti-social behavior.  Or both.  But he denied doing it, and denied ever meeting the women he was sexting, and more likely than not, those were lies.  People lie.  Society is at this point mostly immune to it all. Does Donald Trump lie?  Sure he does.  His lies are so outrageous nobody even reacts. Trump will claim to have "won golf tournaments" that never even took place.  He will say he "won tournaments" at a golf course of his that he had just opened and was the only player. He says that because he is emotionally needy - he needs to feel important, and needs to dominate the headlines, wherever he is.  Americans no longer care.  And that is why nobody much is outraged. You seem to place a large premium on all that, but you are in a very small minority when it comes to personal rectitude. Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2019 at 2:52 AM, Okie said:

They have grown at less than the rate of inflation.  However, I do not know how they have done relative to the private sector (although federal wages are supposed to mirror wages in private sector among large companies).

Your proposal is almost certainly unconstitutional (right to peaceably assemble, right to contract, right to speech, etc.).  Another misconception you have is that neither federal employees nor their unions are allowed to negotiate their wages, which puts them in a far weaker bargaining position.  Right now, it is leading to exploitation by management.  All you would be doing with your proposal is shift the balance of power in favor of management.

Illinois (or any other state), does not print its own currency, which is why states should be limited in how much they can borrow relative to their gross domestic product.  However, many pension funds were based on unrealistic stock market returns and 2008-2009 brought those back to earth (that's why many of them are in trouble).  Incidentally, Social Security's trust fund is now more solvent than last year due to the growing economy.  https://www.ssa.gov/oact/TRSUM/

Actually, you can.  All labor is underpaid in the United States.  Probably the world, actually.

$40,000 in San Francisco is paltry.  Do you know how much it costs to live in a studio apartment there?  After taxes, that is probably not even a subsistence wage for that locality.  That might be a good wage for a small town in the Midwest where you (and I) live, but not in San Francisco.

First you said this...  Then you said this:

[original material edited; inflammatory]

From a legal perspective, people who come here without first applying for a visa are "undocumented" not "illegal."  That is particularly true of people who come here seeking asylum, which we are required to process due to treaty obligations and international law (yes, there really is such a thing -- it was my main area of study in law school).  https://cmsny.org/publications/barsky-us-legal-responsibilities-asylum-seekers/

Most of the undocumented aliens end up on farms picking apples or watermelons.  It is backbreaking work in often terrible conditions.  And right now, we can afford them and need them.

You say you are a Christian.  Well, here is something Jesus said:

35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

So where is the Christian message in trying to keep refugees out?   Especially as we have the power to help them.  I see a patent inconsistency in your Christianity.

1. You are asserting that government employees have lost income due to inflation. Most government contracts go above and beyond inflation. The average private employee has no contract. I am sure they have done far better than the private sector. 

You are avoiding the issue of retirement and medical insurance which is also far better on the government side. Private industry has virtually given up on offering retirement programs. Private medical plans, if any, are only partly paid in most cases.  

2.  Workers for San Francisco can commute like most people do who cannot afford to live in high priced areas, that has always been the case. BART is there for a reason.

Here is what BART potential pay is for a janitor https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/BART-Janitor-Made-270K-in-Pay-and-Benefits-Last-Year-Report-399550951.html

Should You Buy a Mattress Online or in the Store?

 

3. You are denying that the Democrat Party and RINO crony capitalists are trying to get illegal aliens to vote and that their reason for wanting more illegal aliens is to take over our country with their socialistic policies forever and to subvert our constitution. You have a lot of people who are happy to go along with you. As for your ignorant racist claim. I am as brown as most Mexicans. My grandmother spoke Spanish as her mother tongue. Our family originated in southern New Mexico. I am largely Spanish and Apache, the rest is other Southern European. I am also 11% Irish and 1% Black from Senegal. You are indeed an elitist who thinks you can lord it over the lower classes and tell them how you and your buddies will take care of them if they will just be good kids and do as they are told. Please correct me if I am wrong. 

Flooding our country with illegal aliens is not affordable and not fair to legal aliens who come in as they should. It defies the rule of law. You should know about the law, but chose to distort it for whatever you want. That is why lawyers generally have the very lowest ranking in occupations that are trusted. Our country is deeply in debt and cannot afford the flood of illegal aliens. If we could I would be up for it but only in a legal way not as invaders. 

It seems that you think Christians should allow illegal aliens including Muslims to invade our country as immigrants. We allow more immigrants in legally than any other country. That is not good enough for you. Well, politically active people around the world are rebelling against these crazy socialist ideas and hopefully will win out. If not socialism will enslave us all. Meanwhile, Christians are being murdered all around the world because they prefer not to fight or have had their weapons proscribed or taken away. 

See Conservatism Around the World  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1twQ_yBtl-FPwhXf2mYA7qvGj1D8yts8El0m8nObWxuU/edit

See Religious Persecution https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dnCYHAYSmKztKhWYS-esLqlIw-b8RX9-pm_An5Yokh4/edit

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/22/2019 at 9:31 PM, Mark Bahner said:

Speaking of Kodak moments, how about Donald Trump declaring his love for Kim Jong Un, like a blushing bride-to-be? (That orange color is his form of blushing, right?)

Or how about the moment when he declared that John McCain wasn't a war hero, because John McCain was a prisoner of war? So much for all the men who spent time at the Hanoi Hilton...while Trump was in whatever Hilton he was in! Because going to war is for idiots, right? Smart people don't go to war, just like they don't pay taxes, right?

Gee, I hear so many people calling President Trump a liar but never heard a peep from those people about the lies of the entire Obama administration in eight years. Maybe they weren't paying attention. Oh, and all the lies to try to get rid of Trump even before he was elected. Well, maybe they will get around to fit soon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll just leave this MOAB right here. 

Video and also transcript (pastebin plain text link and also same transcript in the attached .txt file)

Just read the transcript in the pastebin link or the attached text file if you don't want to see the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_yMcVq6-ak&t=11m00s

https://pastebin.com/EgVuDxuX

 

20190425_201213.jpg

joe_digenova_moab.txt

^ plain text file of transcript, 8kb

 

Sample of transcript:

Huckabee:  '''Bob Woodard is saying this was the work of John Brennan:'''

'''Joe DiGenova:'''  
"Well there is no doubt. This is pretty simple stuff for career prosecutors like Rudy and myself.  It has been evident from day one there was a brazen plot to exonerate Hillary illegally and then if she lost the election to frame Donald Trump.  This dossier was a knowing part of that.  It was created by Hillary Clinton.  It was created knowingly by John Brenna as part of a scheme to do everything they could to harm Donald Trump.  The problem for Brennan and Clapper and Comey and Baker and all of them now is that the FISA court has already communicated with DOJ about its findings.  And their findings are that for four years before the election of Donald Trump there was an illegal spying operation going on by FBI contractors, 4 of them, to steal personal information, electronic information about Americans and to use it against the Republican Party.  There are going to be indictments.  There are going to be Grand Juries.  John Brennan isn't going to need one lawyer, he's going to need five."
 

 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2019 at 8:24 AM, Jan van Eck said:

I am perfectly happy to "have a serious discussion."  I do not, typically, post either links or pictures - unless it is an actual photo of an object under discussion, such as that rogue oil tanker that ran aground off Syria. 

Is the American public "outraged" by Trump lies?  Not really.  Most just shrug it off as rather immature behavior.  Then again, lots of politicians are immature. To say that only Republicans are immature is not credible.  I invite you to review the conduct of Anthony Weiner, a Member of Congress representing New York City (part of it).   He was busy sending lewd pictures of his sex organs, in erect, aroused posture,  to women he had never met, typically quite young.  After being outed for that, he kept it up and continued to do "sexting" to young women.  Ultimately his wife, a Clinton top associate, divorced him.  He still kept it up.  To quote from Wikipedia:

     "Following a report from the Daily Mail in September 2016, the FBI investigated Weiner for sexting with a 15-year-old girl. His laptop was seized and emails related to the Hillary Clinton email controversy were found on it, causing a controversy late in the presidential election. On May 19, 2017, Weiner pled guilty to one count of transferring obscene material to a minor. His wife, Huma Abedin, filed for divorce prior to Weiner's guilty plea. In September, he was sentenced to 21 months in federal prison. He served his sentence at Federal Medical Center, Devens, in Ayer, Massachusetts."

Now you can argue that this is mentally-ill behaviour, if you like, or you can say that he is a narcissist, and immature, and engaging in anti-social behavior.  Or both.  But he denied doing it, and denied ever meeting the women he was sexting, and more likely than not, those were lies.  People lie.  Society is at this point mostly immune to it all. Does Donald Trump lie?  Sure he does.  His lies are so outrageous nobody even reacts. Trump will claim to have "won golf tournaments" that never even took place.  He will say he "won tournaments" at a golf course of his that he had just opened and was the only player. He says that because he is emotionally needy - he needs to feel important, and needs to dominate the headlines, wherever he is.  Americans no longer care.  And that is why nobody much is outraged. You seem to place a large premium on all that, but you are in a very small minority when it comes to personal rectitude. Cheers.

On 4/23/2019 at 10:47 PM, ronwagn said:

 

The only difference is that no one is supporting Weiner (Democrats nor anyone else).  Where is Weiner now?  Divorced and removed from politics.  However, those on this thread apparently dont care about the lies.  Instead you are embracing the republican Weiner (Trump).  Shameful. 

So when Donald Trump says there was no collusion do you believe him?  I certainly do not.  Was Mueller able to prove there was collusion?  No and I accept that.  However, that does not mean collusion did not take place.  Mueller was just not able to prove it.  If you want to investigate the Democrats go ahead and if they did something wrong they should be prosecuted.  If the Democrats obstruct justice as much as Trump I would say they are guilty too.      

Trump is setting a fine example of what a president can get away with.  I hope you are all happy with the precedent being set for future presidents (Democrat or Republican).  Im expecting that none of you will complain.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, 6ACFC0 said:

The only difference is that no one is supporting Weiner (Democrats nor anyone else).  Where is Weiner now?  Divorced and removed from politics.  However, those on this thread apparently dont care about the lies.  Instead you are embracing the republican Weiner (Trump).  Shameful. 

Ludicrous example. A better choice would be Hillary who was sending classified info on her phone and running a home brewed server. I think it's virtually certain the Chinese accessed her server and most likely the Russians as well.

Democrats doubled down on her and nominated her to run for the presidency.

 

15 hours ago, 6ACFC0 said:

So when Donald Trump says there was no collusion do you believe him?  I certainly do not.  Was Mueller able to prove there was collusion?  No and I accept that.  However, that does not mean collusion did not take place.  Mueller was just not able to prove it.  If you want to investigate the Democrats go ahead and if they did something wrong they should be prosecuted.  If the Democrats obstruct justice as much as Trump I would say they are guilty too. 

It sounds like you have secret information showing Trump colluded with Russia. You should share this with the US government or the state media.

 

15 hours ago, 6ACFC0 said:

Trump is setting a fine example of what a president can get away with.  I hope you are all happy with the precedent being set for future presidents (Democrat or Republican).  Im expecting that none of you will complain.

The only thing Trump is getting away with is the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years. This quarter's growth was 3.2% vs the 'experts' expected 2.3% growth. How can professional economists be wrong by almost 1%? They, along with state media and the Deep State, have been trying to talk the US into a recession ever since Trump was elected in the hope it would destroy his agenda and sink his chances at reelection.

  • Great Response! 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

046e06a4e330d7c99f8815c60a96053e077b81d504027be2d25d40955ab5e011.png

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2019 at 2:52 AM, Okie said:

They have grown at less than the rate of inflation.  However, I do not know how they have done relative to the private sector (although federal wages are supposed to mirror wages in private sector among large companies).

Not true. One part of federal government pay is 'locality'. That is, it accounts for the higher cost of living depending on where you work to make their pay competitive with private sector. Add up all their benefits (pension, matching 401k, job security, health plans, paid days off) and fed govt workers are doing very well compared to the average person.

Depending on state their pay and benefits could be even better (with exception maybe of their 401k and unrealistic assumption of pension returns).

 

On 4/24/2019 at 2:52 AM, Okie said:

Illinois (or any other state), does not print its own currency, which is why states should be limited in how much they can borrow relative to their gross domestic product.  However, many pension funds were based on unrealistic stock market returns and 2008-2009 brought those back to earth (that's why many of them are in trouble). 

Don't pretend state politicians didn't have a hand in this, spending money and promising retirement benefits based on the most optimistic returns from pension investment funds. Now they are stuck with these unfunded liabilities. Many state workers are not going to see as big a pension as they were promised but at least they'll still have a pension. Most people don't get this.

 

On 4/24/2019 at 2:52 AM, Okie said:

Incidentally, Social Security's trust fund is now more solvent than last year due to the growing economy.

Guess those Trump tax cuts and tariffs weren't so bad after all.

 

On 4/24/2019 at 2:52 AM, Okie said:

Actually, you can.  All labor is underpaid in the United States.  Probably the world, actually.

No. You can argue many government workers are overpaid. You are paid what you can command according to your skill set. See above.

 

On 4/24/2019 at 2:52 AM, Okie said:

$40,000 in San Francisco is paltry.  Do you know how much it costs to live in a studio apartment there?  After taxes, that is probably not even a subsistence wage for that locality.  That might be a good wage for a small town in the Midwest where you (and I) live, but not in San Francisco.

SF is an outlier. Even sw engineers making 200k can't afford to buy a house there.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's try a bit harder to keep it civil.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/9/2019 at 6:49 PM, shadowkin said:

This dossier was originally funded by none other than Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party.

Liar. The dossier was originally funded by the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative organization. Go spread your right-wing BS somewhere else.

 

On 4/9/2019 at 6:49 PM, shadowkin said:

Deep State

Drink! LOL!

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites