Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

US Politics Hamsterwheel v2.0

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

US Politics Hamsterwheel v2.0

Old 8th May 2019, 20:33
  #18281 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 72
Posts: 1,561
Not really the same numbers at all. We took the Donald then for a self-made millionaire who had hit a run of bad luck.

What we now know is that he was coasting on $400 million from his father, plus a lot of borrowed money, millions he was never going to repay his bankers, and thousands, tens of thousands he was never going to pay his employees, his contractors, and his suppliers, and that over just ten years he had burnt his way through a cool billion, one hundred million bucks per year!

We used to buy what the Donald was selling, but now we are seeing some new numbers, when that has given us a new and better way of understanding the Legend of the Donald. One or two bone spurs ... okay, those we can overlook, sort of, but a billion dollars? Nope.
chuks is offline  
Old 8th May 2019, 21:29
  #18282 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,011
Well, Fred:

1) "unlawful" doesn't have to mean commiting a crime. It can just mean something not conforming to or complying with lawful (or "due") process. Cops come to your house demanding to search it. They have no warrant. You can tell them their demand is "unlawful," and that doesn't mean they'll get prosecuted for anything - simply that you don't have to comply with their unlawful demand.

Now, if they go further and force their way in without a proper warrant, that's a different matter - that would be a violation of law for which they can and should be brought up on charges.

In the first case, technically you (or your lawyer) can file a complaint with the department about the unlawful attempt to conduct a search. Maybe nothing will happen, maybe the cops involved will get an admonishment, maybe they'll get fired. Very unlikely anyone would go to the expense or trouble of a full-blown court case. (We have a laid-back saying over here - "It was a screw-up - let's not make a Federal Case out of it!").

None of that means that SHS herself actually has the legal expertise of, say, the average gerbil. She's just a mouthpiece. Nadler complied with the pro-forma law for requesting, and then demanding materials from DoJ. He issued subpoenas on the authority of Congress as laid down in the Constitution. DoJ says it has privilege and doesn't have to comply. That goes to the courts to decide, at this point.

2) As to the Supreme Court, it's not as simple as they are conservative and thus on Trump's side. They do have other considerations - the verdict of history, what precedent they are willing to set (which may be used by a rabid pinko socialist President the next time around), what precedents they are willing to overturn (a radical "activist" revisionary act), what is best long-term for the rule of law in the American Republic, and their reputation. This is known as The Roberts Court after the guy in charge, and John Roberts is going to be very careful to avoid looking like he's running a partisan organization in Trump's pocket (He already personally flunked his fellow Republicans/Conservatives on their claim that Obamacare was unconstitutional). Even Trump's appointees may not be on his side in this particular dispute, and Roberts plus the liberal 4 is enough to either make a decision against the Presidency and/or DoJ, or simply reject taking the case and letting a lower-court ruling stand, one way or another.

3) Since many of these questions will end up in the courts, the Dems in Congress need to make sure they have dotted all their I's and crossed all their T's, procedurally. They have to give Trump, Barr et al every opportunity to be reasonable and comply - it will help their case in the long run. So they are proceding with "all deliberate speed." That may appear "hapless" for the moment - but it is the difference between slugging the guy who just hit you (Trump's approach), and taking your time to file assault charges and get him put away for 5 years.
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 8th May 2019, 22:18
  #18283 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 72
Posts: 1,561
Trump is just stalling, hoping to run out the clock. If Congress gets a ruling after the next election then it won't matter as much as getting the information they are legally entitled to right now.

From what several TV lawyers have said, this business of asking for Trump's returns is not predicated on Congress having a real good reason for that; the law says simply that they have a right to see Trump's tax returns.

This reminds me more and more of some people I have encountered who go a bit mad, being completely unreasonable, when sometimes that works, because they are just too much trouble to deal with. It's the Roy Cohn approach, hitting back with all you have, when right and wrong do not come into it. What we are seeing is sort of like getting rear-ended, and then having the guilty party claim that you backed into him; that might just work, so why not try it? Here's Trump, and Sarah too, blustering away about all of this being simply outrageous, making lots of noise but no sense at all.

Who could ever have predicted a President claiming that he's now entitled to a six-year term because the first two years were ruined by his political opponents? Is it completely out of the question that this clown might well refuse to concede defeat if he wins the Popular Vote and loses the Electoral Vote?
chuks is offline  
Old 8th May 2019, 23:35
  #18284 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vendee
Posts: 138
Very nice reply Pattern. Thank you for explaining the ins and outs. Explanations like this go a long way toward an understanding of what is playing out at the moment and are much appreciated.

Chuks. Perhaps you noticed that this evening the Spiegel Online was running the Iran story as the lead. Some amount of worry out there to say the least.

Originally Posted by pattern_is_full View Post
Well, Fred:

1) "unlawful" doesn't have to mean commiting a crime. It can just mean something not conforming to or complying with lawful (or "due") process. Cops come to your house demanding to search it. They have no warrant. You can tell them their demand is "unlawful," and that doesn't mean they'll get prosecuted for anything - simply that you don't have to comply with their unlawful demand.

Now, if they go further and force their way in without a proper warrant, that's a different matter - that would be a violation of law for which they can and should be brought up on charges.

In the first case, technically you (or your lawyer) can file a complaint with the department about the unlawful attempt to conduct a search. Maybe nothing will happen, maybe the cops involved will get an admonishment, maybe they'll get fired. Very unlikely anyone would go to the expense or trouble of a full-blown court case. (We have a laid-back saying over here - "It was a screw-up - let's not make a Federal Case out of it!").

None of that means that SHS herself actually has the legal expertise of, say, the average gerbil. She's just a mouthpiece. Nadler complied with the pro-forma law for requesting, and then demanding materials from DoJ. He issued subpoenas on the authority of Congress as laid down in the Constitution. DoJ says it has privilege and doesn't have to comply. That goes to the courts to decide, at this point.

2) As to the Supreme Court, it's not as simple as they are conservative and thus on Trump's side. They do have other considerations - the verdict of history, what precedent they are willing to set (which may be used by a rabid pinko socialist President the next time around), what precedents they are willing to overturn (a radical "activist" revisionary act), what is best long-term for the rule of law in the American Republic, and their reputation. This is known as The Roberts Court after the guy in charge, and John Roberts is going to be very careful to avoid looking like he's running a partisan organization in Trump's pocket (He already personally flunked his fellow Republicans/Conservatives on their claim that Obamacare was unconstitutional). Even Trump's appointees may not be on his side in this particular dispute, and Roberts plus the liberal 4 is enough to either make a decision against the Presidency and/or DoJ, or simply reject taking the case and letting a lower-court ruling stand, one way or another.

3) Since many of these questions will end up in the courts, the Dems in Congress need to make sure they have dotted all their I's and crossed all their T's, procedurally. They have to give Trump, Barr et al every opportunity to be reasonable and comply - it will help their case in the long run. So they are proceding with "all deliberate speed." That may appear "hapless" for the moment - but it is the difference between slugging the guy who just hit you (Trump's approach), and taking your time to file assault charges and get him put away for 5 years.
Uncle Fred is offline  
Old 9th May 2019, 03:04
  #18285 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 137
Originally Posted by chuks View Post
Not really the same numbers at all. We took the Donald then for a self-made millionaire who had hit a run of bad luck.

What we now know is that he was coasting on $400 million from his father, plus a lot of borrowed money, millions he was never going to repay his bankers, and thousands, tens of thousands he was never going to pay his employees, his contractors, and his suppliers, and that over just ten years he had burnt his way through a cool billion, one hundred million bucks per year!

We used to buy what the Donald was selling, but now we are seeing some new numbers, when that has given us a new and better way of understanding the Legend of the Donald. One or two bone spurs ... okay, those we can overlook, sort of, but a billion dollars? Nope.
Everybody acts like itís a revelation, the numbers, the banks involved, who D bank had to go to share the massive loans, have to admit itís a neat trick to borrow so much that the lender simply cannot call in the loan, then has to go to market to get other banks to alleviate their % risk, itís all been out there since the mid nineties, hell he even wrote a book about it.
Anybody with any memory of the number of companies involved in the building industry that went bankrupt back then it was enormous.
Whatever you think of him, his businesses managed to survive, by luck, skill or whatever else.
Using bankruptcy as a tool is nothing new in that game, same as low to mid level Govt contracting, all part of the toolbox.

I chuckle every time I see the politicians frothing at the mouth, all beaten by a guy from Queens, first time out, elected President.

Shows just how useless politicians are.

Oh well.
fltlt is offline  
Old 9th May 2019, 05:28
  #18286 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 72
Posts: 1,561
Donald Trump types; he can not write.

(It's hard to write a word that lacks vowels, so that I shall dub thee "Dude F." What you have there,"fltlt," reads like a stifled sneeze.)

Dude F, you seem to have a bug in your dot-recognition program, let alone your join-up-the-dots one.

First off, Donald Trump did not "write" Trump: The Art of the Deal. Donald Trump literally could not write a shopping list; the man is merely semi-literate, as just a glimpse of one of his tweets will show. The book was written, every word of it, by a professional writer named Tony Schwartz. Donald commissioned Tony to write the book, making him a crazy-generous offer of 50% of its profits, which turned Tony from an ink-stained wretch into a wealthy man. Tony, the ingrate, later wrote a tell-all article for The New Yorker about how difficult it was to keep Trump's attention long enough at any one time to get the material for the book. (I can recommend it to you as a good read, one that can give you some insight into what goes on in the messy mind of Donald Trump.)

The Donald kept very well hidden the seeming fact that Father Fred was passing along a vast pile of moolah to his posing genius son. That seems to have been done on a practical basis in order to evade tax (illegally), but also for simple reasons of image.

It was generally unknown that Donald Trump was anything but a self-made millionaire or billionaire, depending, back when he first became semi-famous, that he was merely dabbling in various failed schemes using Daddy's money. We only were told this about a month ago.

Dude F, you wrote ... let me re-phrase that. You typed this:

Anybody with any memory of the number of companies involved in the building industry that went bankrupt back then it was enormous.
Whatever you think of him, his businesses managed to survive, by luck, skill or whatever else.

You do not need an MBA to know that "went bankrupt" refers generally to companies which failed, yet you believe that Trump's businesses which went bankrupt "managed to survive." No, because they went bankrupt they failed, most spectacularly the Trump Taj Mahal Casino. Donald Trump can't even make money running casinos!

Later, of course, at least one of his businesses, Trump University, did not just fail; it was judged to be fraudulent. So there is that ....

His family charity, The Donald J. Trump Foundation, was also found to be a scam, no real charity at all but just Donald's private piggy bank. Also a failure, it was dissolved, with the way it operated possibly leading to future criminal charges for tax violations.

Dude F, what you are peddling here is just another version of "Oh, they all do this sort of thing, what the Donald did, and you lot are ninnies for not understanding that as I do." In reality, you need to get your head out of that dark place and do a bit more reading into the reality of Trump. It is not what you seem to think it is, or perhaps you really do not care to find that out. He was not a real businessman but a fraudster, and now he is not a real politician (obviously) and thus not any sort of effective President. If watching this unfolding national disaster just puts you into fits of giggles, well, that is just you, and good luck with that.

Stick around, Dude F. I hope that you, and the rest of us too, find out "just how useless politicians are." For one thing, thinking of them as being so can land one in jail, where Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort sit right now. Michael Flynn shall follow them at some point, once the FBI is finished squeezing facts out about what he was up to. That trio of putzes all thought, mesmerized by their proximity to Trump, that nobody could do much to them, that Trump was going to squash that useless Washington establishment flat and show us all a new way to get things done. It turned out for them that the old way of getting things done often prevails.

Now we watch to see what happens when Trump and his crowd ignore Congressional subpoenas. Doing that once led to one possible impeachment charge against Nixon, for failing to turn over those tapes. "Useless politicians" got rid of a crooked President then. Want to bet that they can't rid us of another yet more crooked, one? You guys who are still dazzled by the sunshine coming out of Trump's big, fat arse need to do some background reading before you place your bets. That said, yes, he might well survive and even be re-elected, but the odds of that happening are shrinking daily, with each fresh discovery.

It is all very well to go along with the Donald and denounce all of what is going on now as "FAKE!" but sitting in jail can come to seem very, very real.

When you choose to mess with one arm of the US Government, the Legislative Branch, in the way that Trump and his Executive Branch are doing, that just shows how little of a politician the man really is. In his position he does need a certain amount of political ability, along with the usual respect for the rule of law (boring, I know, but still necessary). Trump needs that in order to get much of anything done, but also to keep himself and his circle of collaborators and conspirators out of trouble. As it is, the buttons are falling off his overcoat one by one.
chuks is offline  
Old 9th May 2019, 16:48
  #18287 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,011
Originally Posted by fltlt View Post
I chuckle every time I see the politicians frothing at the mouth, all beaten by a guy from Queens, first time out, elected President.

Shows just how useless politicians are.

Oh well.
I find it such an interesting - quirk - that the conservatives here all eventually end up expressing pleasure in the pain or misery of others.

I don't even want TRUMP to feel miserable, although it may be an unfortunate side-effect of blocking some of his policies or removing him from office by one legal means or another.
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 9th May 2019, 18:26
  #18288 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,474
Originally Posted by chuks View Post
Donald Trump is a product of New York City.
Suppose that Donald Trump is an asshole, and suppose that Donald Trump is from New York City; but I repeat myself.
(variation on Mark Twain's "Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress; but I repeat myself.")
His behavior should not surprise anyone.
One way to look at his winning an election is that the electorate, and those who didn't bother to vote, in the aggregate arrived at this conclusion:
"we've tried about everything else, let's try an asshole."
In a democracy (or even in a constitutional republic with universal suffrage) the people get the government that they deserve.

For ORAC
Seriously, just how bad was Hillary Clinton as a candidate?.......
Well, she is originally from the Mid West (reasonably wealthy family that could afford to send her to Yale), but after being First Lady she moved to New York so that she could become a Senator. (The rails were greased for that, separate topic). So maybe she got infected a bit with the New York Asshole disease. Seems plausible.

For Uncle Fred
While I think it's a bit of saber rattling, Bolton is certainly a new wrinkle in the "send a carrier to show that we are serious" move that the US has been doing for decades. I remember back in about 2006 we had a couple of CVBG floating about in the Persian Gulf, Bolton was making noise at the UN, and Cheney/Rummy were posturing big time.
No shots fired, though people of all stripes were proclaming that the US was going to invade Iran (this whill utterly engaged in Iraq in a mess with over 100k on the ground). What I am not seeing is major troop movements. I think that to play this for a winning hand, any armed action has to be a reaction to something Iran does. So the pieces are in place waiting to see if there is a bluff, or a play to be made. Unclear beyond that. I have a guess for you: the bombers and this sortie of a CV to the northern I.O. / Arabian Gulf area may be a signal in response to some noise a few days back from Iran that, if they want to, they can close the Straits of Hormuz. I suppose I need to stay a bit closer to current events.

Trump as the savior of Israel ... interesting rhetoric, but I think Bibi wants to reserve that title for himself.

Pompeo playing hard ball with Iraq. Hmmm, not a surprise, but as I see it, that kind of leaning on an ally/acquaintance can backfire and maybe drive the Iraqi government to be a bit more cooperative with Iran, even if they keep much of it under the table. They have their pride, ya know?

Trump and taxes and losses: we can thank the tax code and GAAP for how you can run at a loss and stay rich.

Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 9th May 2019 at 18:45.
Lonewolf_50 is online now  
Old 9th May 2019, 18:41
  #18289 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 137
[QUOTE=chuks;10466830](It's hard to write a word that lacks vowels, so that I shall dub thee "Dude F." What you have there,"fltlt," reads like a stifled sneeze.)

Dude F, you seem to have a bug in your dot-recognition program, let alone your join-up-the-dots one.

First off, Donald Trump did not "write" Trump: The Art of the Deal. Donald Trump literally could not write a shopping list; the man is merely semi-literate, as just a glimpse of one of his tweets will show. The book was written, every word of it, by a professional writer named Tony Schwartz. Donald commissioned Tony to write the book, making him a crazy-generous offer of 50% of its profits, which turned Tony from an ink-stained wretch into a wealthy man. Tony, the ingrate, later wrote a tell-all article for The New Yorker about how difficult it was to keep Trump's attention long enough at any one time to get the material for the book. (I can recommend it to you as a good read, one that can give you some insight into what goes on in the messy mind of Donald Trump.)

The Donald kept very well hidden the seeming fact that Father Fred was passing along a vast pile of moolah to his posing genius son. That seems to have been done on a practical basis in order to evade tax (illegally), but also for simple reasons of image.

It was generally unknown that Donald Trump was anything but a self-made millionaire or billionaire, depending, back when he first became semi-famous, that he was merely dabbling in various failed schemes using Daddy's money. We only were told this about a month ago.

Dude F, you wrote ... let me re-phrase that. You typed this:

Anybody with any memory of the number of companies involved in the building industry that went bankrupt back then it was enormous.
Whatever you think of him, his businesses managed to survive, by luck, skill or whatever else.

You do not need an MBA to know that "went bankrupt" refers generally to companies which failed, yet you believe that Trump's businesses which went bankrupt "managed to survive." No, because they went bankrupt they failed, most spectacularly the Trump Taj Mahal Casino. Donald Trump can't even make money running casinos!

Later, of course, at least one of his businesses, Trump University, did not just fail; it was judged to be fraudulent. So there is that ....

His family charity, The Donald J. Trump Foundation, was also found to be a scam, no real charity at all but just Donald's private piggy bank. Also a failure, it was dissolved, with the way it operated possibly leading to future criminal charges for tax violations.

Dude F, what you are peddling here is just another version of "Oh, they all do this sort of thing, what the Donald did, and you lot are ninnies for not understanding that as I do." In reality, you need to get your head out of that dark place and do a bit more reading into the reality of Trump. It is not what you seem to think it is, or perhaps you really do not care to find that out. He was not a real businessman but a fraudster, and now he is not a real politician (obviously) and thus not any sort of effective President. If watching this unfolding national disaster just puts you into fits of giggles, well, that is just you, and good luck with that.

Stick around, Dude F. I hope that you, and the rest of us too, find out "just how useless politicians are." For one thing, thinking of them as being so can land one in jail, where Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort sit right now. Michael Flynn shall follow them at some point, once the FBI is finished squeezing facts out about what he was up to. That trio of putzes all thought, mesmerized by their proximity to Trump, that nobody could do much to them, that Trump was going to squash that useless Washington establishment flat and show us all a new way to get things done. It turned out for them that the old way of getting things done often prevails.

Now we watch to see what happens when Trump and his crowd ignore Congressional subpoenas. Doing that once led to one possible impeachment charge against Nixon, for failing to turn over those tapes. "Useless politicians" got rid of a crooked President then. Want to bet that they can't rid us of another yet more crooked, one? You guys who are still dazzled by the sunshine coming out of Trump's big, fat arse need to do some background reading before you place your bets. That said, yes, he might well survive and even be re-elected, but the odds of that happening are shrinking daily, with each fresh discovery.

It is all very well to go along with the Donald and denounce all of what is going on now as "FAKE!" but sitting in jail can come to seem very, very real.

When you choose to mess with one arm of the US Government, the Legislative Branch, in the way that Trump and his Executive Branch are doing, that just shows how little of a politician the man really is. In his position he does need a certain amount of political ability, along with the usual respect for the rule of law (boring, I know, but still necessary). Trump needs that in order to get much of anything done, but also to keep himself and his circle of collaborators and conspirators out of trouble. As it is, the buttons are falling off his overcoat one by one.[/QUOT
fltlt is offline  
Old 9th May 2019, 18:46
  #18290 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 137
Originally Posted by chuks View Post
(It's hard to write a word that lacks vowels, so that I shall dub thee "Dude F." What you have there,"fltlt," reads like a stifled sneeze.)

Dude F, you seem to have a bug in your dot-recognition program, let alone your join-up-the-dots one.

First off, Donald Trump did not "write" Trump: The Art of the Deal. Donald Trump literally could not write a shopping list; the man is merely semi-literate, as just a glimpse of one of his tweets will show. The book was written, every word of it, by a professional writer named Tony Schwartz. Donald commissioned Tony to write the book, making him a crazy-generous offer of 50% of its profits, which turned Tony from an ink-stained wretch into a wealthy man. Tony, the ingrate, later wrote a tell-all article for The New Yorker about how difficult it was to keep Trump's attention long enough at any one time to get the material for the book. (I can recommend it to you as a good read, one that can give you some insight into what goes on in the messy mind of Donald Trump.)

The Donald kept very well hidden the seeming fact that Father Fred was passing along a vast pile of moolah to his posing genius son. That seems to have been done on a practical basis in order to evade tax (illegally), but also for simple reasons of image.

It was generally unknown that Donald Trump was anything but a self-made millionaire or billionaire, depending, back when he first became semi-famous, that he was merely dabbling in various failed schemes using Daddy's money. We only were told this about a month ago.

Dude F, you wrote ... let me re-phrase that. You typed this:

Anybody with any memory of the number of companies involved in the building industry that went bankrupt back then it was enormous.
Whatever you think of him, his businesses managed to survive, by luck, skill or whatever else.

You do not need an MBA to know that "went bankrupt" refers generally to companies which failed, yet you believe that Trump's businesses which went bankrupt "managed to survive." No, because they went bankrupt they failed, most spectacularly the Trump Taj Mahal Casino. Donald Trump can't even make money running casinos!

Later, of course, at least one of his businesses, Trump University, did not just fail; it was judged to be fraudulent. So there is that ....

His family charity, The Donald J. Trump Foundation, was also found to be a scam, no real charity at all but just Donald's private piggy bank. Also a failure, it was dissolved, with the way it operated possibly leading to future criminal charges for tax violations.

Dude F, what you are peddling here is just another version of "Oh, they all do this sort of thing, what the Donald did, and you lot are ninnies for not understanding that as I do." In reality, you need to get your head out of that dark place and do a bit more reading into the reality of Trump. It is not what you seem to think it is, or perhaps you really do not care to find that out. He was not a real businessman but a fraudster, and now he is not a real politician (obviously) and thus not any sort of effective President. If watching this unfolding national disaster just puts you into fits of giggles, well, that is just you, and good luck with that.

Stick around, Dude F. I hope that you, and the rest of us too, find out "just how useless politicians are." For one thing, thinking of them as being so can land one in jail, where Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort sit right now. Michael Flynn shall follow them at some point, once the FBI is finished squeezing facts out about what he was up to. That trio of putzes all thought, mesmerized by their proximity to Trump, that nobody could do much to them, that Trump was going to squash that useless Washington establishment flat and show us all a new way to get things done. It turned out for them that the old way of getting things done often prevails.

Now we watch to see what happens when Trump and his crowd ignore Congressional subpoenas. Doing that once led to one possible impeachment charge against Nixon, for failing to turn over those tapes. "Useless politicians" got rid of a crooked President then. Want to bet that they can't rid us of another yet more crooked, one? You guys who are still dazzled by the sunshine coming out of Trump's big, fat arse need to do some background reading before you place your bets. That said, yes, he might well survive and even be re-elected, but the odds of that happening are shrinking daily, with each fresh discovery.

It is all very well to go along with the Donald and denounce all of what is going on now as "FAKE!" but sitting in jail can come to seem very, very real.

When you choose to mess with one arm of the US Government, the Legislative Branch, in the way that Trump and his Executive Branch are doing, that just shows how little of a politician the man really is. In his position he does need a certain amount of political ability, along with the usual respect for the rule of law (boring, I know, but still necessary). Trump needs that in order to get much of anything done, but also to keep himself and his circle of collaborators and conspirators out of trouble. As it is, the buttons are falling off his overcoat one by one.
Chuks,

Now who is playing king maker here, naming folks, thatís oh so 2nd grade, whatís next spitballs at 2 meters?

However I accept your childish moniker, just to humor you.
fltlt is offline  
Old 9th May 2019, 22:10
  #18291 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 72
Posts: 1,561
Well, thanks!

Ever read Dead Souls? Its protagonist, Chichikov, has a name like a sneeze, and fltlt, when you try to say it, sounds for all the world like a stifled sneeze. (I know, I know ... that's just, like, my opinion, man. But that is true!)

Another thing Chichikov has is poshlost. That is one Russian word that encompasses "triviality, vulgarity, sexual promiscuity, and a lack of spirituality." Remind you of anyone?

When Vladimir first commented on Donald he called him an "ochení yarkiy chelovek," literally a "very bright person." Turns out that "bright" to a Russian does not mean "highly intelligent," but someone who is flashy: a mere show-off. Trump went around telling people that Putin said that he was brilliant.

One wonders what the Donald would think of being told that he is the embodiment of poshlost. "It's got 'posh' in it so it must mean something like 'rich,' huh? That's good .... "
chuks is offline  
Old 10th May 2019, 00:10
  #18292 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: California
Posts: 344
chuks,
among the litany of "stuff" our erstwhile prez has (so far) avoided, was being taken to task legally for his "university" scam.
A large southern state was about to do that a few years ago when they were told to stop, the then governor of that state is now fairly high up in the current administration, sucking off the fed tit rather than the state one.
Hopefully one day all of this shit will fall on those golden locks.
f
fleigle is offline  
Old 10th May 2019, 06:41
  #18293 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 72
Posts: 1,561
I guess you know how that Trump University case was settled, when he paid $25 million, about 90% of what he had scammed, without any sort of conviction. It was that or else fighting the case for years and years, running up legal costs and delaying the payback to Trump's victims. Donald hates to lose, and using that tactic he often wins, knowing that his victims look at suing for X amount in damages which is going to cost them more than X in legal costs, plus they are going up against Trump's top lawyers, who fight in very brutal ways. There's a very long list of people Trump has stiffed that way, when the Trump University scam was one that was so big, and so shamelessly illegal that even the State of New York had to weigh in on behalf of his victims. The "win" for Donald was that he paid the $25 million without admitting any guilt.

New York State is now after Donald for his fake charitable trust. They already ordered it shut down, plus they ordered penalties to be paid for the way it was run, but they are also after Donald for tax fraud. On a personal level, it came out that his charity paid the Boy Scouts about $14 as the joining fee for one of his sons. Mr. Rich Guy wouldn't even reach into his own pocket and fish out $14 for the Boy Scouts! That is like being caught stealing Girl Scout Cookies! Bold as brass, our Donald, just one of his qualities his base loves him for.

Roy Cohn, Roy Cohn ... he taught Donald well. The payback for Cohn as he lay dying of AIDS was Trump acting like "Roy who?" when Roy then said, "Donald pisses ice water." When things were good between them the payback for Roy seems to have been this skiving dwarf being seen around town with yet another tall blonde, Donald.

Cohn, a closeted homosexual who enjoyed persecuting other homosexuals (cf. the "Lavender Scare"), enjoyed gallivanting with tall, straight blonde men. One of the first was G. David Schine, and one of the last was Donald J. Trump. Those big, straight guys were some sort of weird arm candy for this downright evil little homosexual; he used lesser and more vulnerable men for sex, keeping that somewhat out of sight.

Donald did pay Roy back with a recent name-check, though. In the Mueller report we can read about how Donald was baffled and upset that his lawyer, Don McGahn, was taking notes. McGahn explained that real lawyers take notes, when Donald said that he'd had top lawyers such as Roy Cohn working for him, when they never took notes. Top or not, Roy Cohn ended up disbarred.
chuks is offline  
Old 10th May 2019, 12:43
  #18294 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: apogee
Age: 65
Posts: 59
What am I missing here?

"Talks with China continue in a very congenial manner - there is absolutely no need to rush - as Tariffs are NOW being paid to the United States by China of 25% on 250 Billion Dollars worth of goods & products. These massive payments go directly to the Treasury of the U.S." (trump tweet)

Tariffs are taxes paid by importers on foreign goods, so the 25% tariff will be paid by American companies who bring Chinese goods into the country
meadowrun is offline  
Old 10th May 2019, 15:42
  #18295 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 72
Posts: 1,561
What you are missing? You aren't missing a thing.

How about the folks who simply enjoy Trump for the way he is shaking things up, the way he is annoying all those coastal elites, the way he just ... is. His base don't care about the fact that a tariff is paid by the purchaser, not by the seller. What Trump said is true at base: he really has increased the tariff on Chinese goods. So Trump's lying about who pays that tariff. It is mere quibbling to point out that this, "Tariffs are NOW being paid to the United States by China of 25% on 250 Billion Dollars worth of goods & products ... " is a reversal of truth, ungrammatically put.

You might as well ask those people to look a bit further down the road, to guess what China is going to do next, and if you could then call that a "trade war." If it is, Trump has promised them that trade wars are "good and easy to win."

If his record of failure from his inauguration (when it rained and the crowds were small, yet Trump spoke of sunshine on a record crowd, the biggest ever) to now (14 different court proceedings against him and his administration and counting) has not alienated his base, why should a trade war do that? He'll come up with some gibberish that will sell them on how a bit of suffering is the price we must pay as loyal Americans.) Here you, straight from the base, written as I was just writing the above:

"Meanwhile both the US and China will have to suck up the disruptions to their standards of living

"Some of us are going to be screwed but our children will benefit in the long run. If we don't act our children will be screwed when they grow up."

Even worse, for some unknown reason we seem to be goading Iran into taking a swing at us, starting not a trade war but a shooting war, when Trump seems intent on stomping Iran flat. Oh, good ... another war in the Middle East! Then we must, as loyal Americans, set doubt aside and line up behind the Donald. Not literally, silly! He will be way back in Washington, D.C. with our military lined up in front of him. He'd like to be at the front but, you know ... bone spurs.

Last edited by chuks; 10th May 2019 at 16:01.
chuks is offline  
Old 10th May 2019, 15:50
  #18296 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,247
Originally Posted by meadowrun View Post
What am I missing here?

"Talks with China continue in a very congenial manner - there is absolutely no need to rush - as Tariffs are NOW being paid to the United States by China of 25% on 250 Billion Dollars worth of goods & products. These massive payments go directly to the Treasury of the U.S." (trump tweet)

Tariffs are taxes paid by importers on foreign goods, so the 25% tariff will be paid by American companies who bring Chinese goods into the country
You have yet to see the long term benefit to our economy.

The idea is to stimulate home grown new businesses and oversea trade opportunities. .

Meanwhile both the US and China will have to suck up the disruptions to their standards of living

Some of us are going to be screwed but our children will benefit in the long run. If we don't act our children will be screwed when they grow up.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 10th May 2019, 18:19
  #18297 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vendee
Posts: 138
Originally Posted by lomapaseo View Post
You have yet to see the long term benefit to our economy.

The idea is to stimulate home grown new businesses and oversea trade opportunities.
Obviously I am outside the touchline looking in at this one, but if there are businesses within the U.S. that are already exporting then they will possibly lose out in other countries as they levy additional tariffs in the tit for tat.This would be a negative.

You say that the idea is to foster new growth at home--businesses that will have overseas trade opportunities. Yet if one is involved in a trade war, those opportunities will be more limited than if one were not contesting the field. Unless of course you want to bring all business back home and cater to only the domestic market--which is certainly your prerogative.

I just don't subscribe to the idea that in an environment of rising tariffs that an increased overseas market is anything close to a sure bet.

The other point is how much the U.S. is going to shell out to the farmers who are losing market share. How can increased revenue from tariffs (as per Trump's bleat) be of any good if it is turned around and given to the farm lobby? I realize this is perhaps a bad example as the farm lobby in the U.S. seems to be a high and holy "do not touch" area. I know that every nation has such an area within its economy so I understand the politics here.


Again, just wondering.

Last edited by Uncle Fred; 10th May 2019 at 18:53.
Uncle Fred is offline  
Old 11th May 2019, 03:25
  #18298 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: apogee
Age: 65
Posts: 59
Future history book entry:

Trump and his cohorts were corrosive to government institutions but he managed to dig a hole for himself,
deep enough to facilitate direct trade with China.
meadowrun is offline  
Old 11th May 2019, 22:53
  #18299 (permalink)  
EstŠ servira para distraerle.
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In a perambulator.
Posts: 1
Of much more importance is the fact that Alyssa Milano has demanded, as a self appointed spokeswoman for American women, a sex strike. This she has done in protest at certain abortion law restrictions of which she does not approve.
Does this mean that I shall no longer be pestered, stalked and propositioned by aggressive and sexual voracious if usually pulchritudinous Yankee women at every cocktail party to which I am invited. A well earned rest would be welcome, such activity does not always come so easy to one of my great and advanced age.
cavortingcheetah is offline  
Old 12th May 2019, 04:06
  #18300 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 72
Posts: 1,561
I feel your pain ....

Yes, Brother, the minute you mention that you are a pilot the glamouries just give you no more peace. Just say, "Did it hurt when you fell from Heaven? And, by the way, I fly the DHC-6-300 (it's an airplane) because I am a bush pilot ... " and then you quickly end up being bombed by room keys and lacy underwear, and buried under a flood of sweet-smelling pneumatic pulchitrude as a dozen women all fight over who gets to drag you off to her love nest.

All the women in a singles bar will drop their boring stockbrokers and lawyers and come running to hear you tell of how you landed on a short strip in the middle of a sandstorm and a camel spider stampede once just one catches a glimpse of your John Joseph Travolta signature model Breitling Cosmonaut Chronograph, or wonders why you are wearing Ray-Ban Aviator sunglasses at 2230 hrs. Local, and just has to ask.

Ms. Milano in her own words: “[The passage of much stricter abortion laws in some US states] is absolutely horrifying to me. Anyone who is not completely and totally outraged by this and doesn’t see where this is leading, I think, is not taking this threat seriously.”

As to how long this happy state of affairs should last, though, Alyssa said, with a philosophical air, “I mean, I don’t know. I sent a tweet last night; I haven’t really thought much past that this morning.”

Someone should send this mad bint a copy of Aristophanes' Lysistrata, originally performed in 411 BCE. She only went back to about 1600 CE for an illustration of a previous sex strike. (Much further back, there is a certain cave painting of a Neanderthal shagging a sabertooth tiger with his woman (?) stood there off to one side with her arms and legs crossed, when archaeologists take that for an example of an early sex strike and its probably fatal consequences.)

Then there was prominent feminist Andrea Dworkin, who threatened to stop having sex with men, when all the men agreed to that without the slightest pause for thought: https://www.google.com/search?q=imag...UD9vW8-irywfM:

I think I met Andrea Dworkin one wet night in a bar in Bennington, Vermont in 1968. This was during one of the very rare dry spells in my campaign of rampant seduction, one only ended by the sudden riveting on of the marital ball and chain. It was either her or what turned out to be her ugly sister. Anyway, make a long story short, she spurned me, the little minx! Well, back then I only had a PPL and a Timex ....

So, fellow aviators, now is the time to go to a singles bar and have a nice, quiet drink: no more sexual harassment! Not until this slightly dim Hollywood B actress and thought-leader decides to tell American women to start getting it on again. I give that one about three days.

Next up, Alyssa Milano on how she keeps her svelte figure, with the "Cucumber DIet."

Last edited by chuks; 12th May 2019 at 04:36.
chuks is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.