192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
izzythepush
 
  3  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 01:19 am
Quote:
The boyhood home of US President Donald Trump is available to rent on Airbnb - and it's furnished with a life-size cardboard cut-out of the man himself.
For a cost of $777 (£615) a night, the "opulent" home in Queens, New York City, can sleep up to 20 people.
"This is a unique and special opportunity to stay in the home of a sitting president," reads the Airbnb rental advertisement.
The Tudor-style home sold for $2.14m two months after Mr Trump's election.
The listing is not affiliated with Mr Trump or the White House, the post's authors emphasise.
The building, which is within walking distance of the subway, according the listing, contains five bedrooms and three-and-a-half bathrooms.
"Not much has been changed since the Trumps lived here, the kitchen is original and the opulent furnishings represent the style and affluence in which the Trumps would have lived," the post says.
There is a person living fulltime in one room of the house, and "there is a giant cut-out of Donald in the Living Room", it adds.
"He is a great companion for watching Fox News late into the night."
Pets and parties are banned, but breakfast is provided.
The house was built by Mr Trump's father, developer Fred Trump, in 1940 and is listed on Mr Trump's birth certificate.
It was the future-president's former home until the age of four, when the Trump family moved into a larger brick mansion nearby.
Last September, Mr Trump told late night TV comedian Jimmy Fallon that he wanted to buy back the home, which shortly afterward was withdrawn from sale.
It was flipped by a developer for $2.14m in March, having sold the previous December for $1.39m.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40870628
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  9  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 01:56 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:
This is a bit amusing to me in that, in most states in this country, the requirements for entry into the voting registry and getting a license to buy a weapon are remarkably similar. One must be;
(1) Alive
(2) A resident of the state in question
(3) meet a minimum age requirement
(4) be without conviction for a serious felony.

Do you object to any of these?



I currently live in a state with a Republican governor, an overwhelming Republican majority in the House and an overwhelming Republican majority in the Senate. It goes without saying that Trump won this state by a very large margin, with many counties going to Trump with more than 70 or 80 percent.

-

In this state, I can purchase a gun without permit. I don't need any training. I don't need a background check. I don't need to register my firearm. I can be a minor. I can be a non-citizen. I can have a documented history of mental health problems.

I can be a convicted felon, even if the crime prevents firearm ownership, as long as the conviction is a certain number of years in the past. If I commit a crime and have my firearm seized and I'm subsequently convicted of the crime, but the crime doesn't prevent firearms ownership, I have to have my firearm returned to me within 30 days as a currently convicted felon. If I own a (non-mandatory) state permit for my firearm and I'm convicted of a crime that prevents firearm ownership but the state fails to remove my permit in a timely manner, I can continue to hold my firearms permit and pass background checks even as a currently convicted felon.

I don't need a license for owning my firearm, I don't need a permit to carry. There is no restriction on sales of firearms to minors. There is no minimum age to posses a firearm. I can open carry or concealed carry almost anywhere without permit. I have the right to concealed carry in all public buildings. I can be a non-citizen and I can still legally carry an unregistered firearm without training, a permit, background checks or a license in sports stadiums, on college campuses, in hospitals, or in the statehouse.

-

The same state has purged tens of thousands of eligible, lawful, correctly registered U.S. citizens off the voter rolls in an "effort to combat voter fraud." Over the course of the last years and after sifting through tens of millions of votes cast, this concerted effort has turned up a total of four cases where the state managed to obtain convictions for voter fraud. Every single case involved an American citizen over the age of 60.

-

I understand that from the vantage point of a cosmopolitan coastal elite Republican, it's a helpful ideological construct to pretend that the right to vote and the right to bear arms are being treated remarkably similar. But on the ground in deep red Republican ruled Trumpland, that is absolutely not a reality.
blatham
 
  6  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 03:30 am
@old europe,
FWIW, I admire your posts more than anyone else's on this site including my own.
blatham
 
  3  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 04:06 am
One should attend to the real experts in a thing.
Quote:
"[Steven] Stills doesn’t know how to do drugs properly,” Keith Richards once said.
NYRB
Lash
 
  0  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 05:24 am
Unpopular news here, but there was no "Russian hack" or Russian interference in the Trump election.

There was an internal leak.

I think, as stated previously, it was Seth Rich. I guess it could have been DWS' boy, Awan.

This whole Russian narrative was concocted by the DNC to avoid accountability for their graft, collusion, and cheating.... as stated previously. There's proof.

So, the web of the Deep State runs thick through the CIA, FBI, ... Everyone who pushed this narrative has a shitstain.

So grateful some people had the balls to stand up to this wall of lies.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/

I'm certain there will be a cacophony to discredit the article.

Save it.
blatham
 
  4  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 05:26 am
This is really encouraging.
Quote:
In a new poll, half of Republicans say they would support postponing the 2020 election if Trump proposed it

...the survey asked two questions about postponing the 2020 election.

- If Donald Trump were to say that the 2020 presidential election should be postponed until the country can make sure that only eligible American citizens can vote, would you support or oppose postponing the election?

- What if both Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress were to say that the 2020 presidential election should be postponed until the country can make sure that only eligible American citizens can vote? Would you support or oppose postponing the election?
Roughly half of Republicans believe Trump won the popular vote — and would support postponing the 2020 election.

Nearly half of Republicans (47 percent) believe that Trump won the popular vote, which is similar to this finding. Larger fractions believe that millions of illegal immigrants voted (68 percent) and that voter fraud happens somewhat or very often (73 percent). Again, this is similar to previous polls.

Moreover, 52 percent said that they would support postponing the 2020 election, and 56 percent said they would do so if both Trump and Republicans in Congress were behind this.
WP
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 05:40 am
NYT screws up on the climate report story. Should not have happened.
WP
Lash
 
  -3  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 05:40 am
@Lash,
Excerpt from the linked article:

All this was set in motion when the DNC’s mail server was first violated in the spring of 2016 and by subsequent assertions that Russians were behind that “hack” and another such operation, also described as a Russian hack, on July 5. These are the foundation stones of the edifice just outlined. The evolution of public discourse in the year since is worthy of scholarly study: Possibilities became allegations, and these became probabilities. Then the probabilities turned into certainties, and these evolved into what are now taken to be established truths. By my reckoning, it required a few days to a few weeks to advance from each of these stages to the next. This was accomplished via the indefensibly corrupt manipulations of language repeated incessantly in our leading media.
----------------------------------------------------
And watching this unfold with not one iota of hard evidence was astonishing, but when you have cronies in the FBI, CIA, media, a political party, and ARE NOT CALLED UPON TO PRODUCE PROOF, you really have unlimited power to create any narrative you please.

Sort of reminiscent of the ground-breaking lawsuit against the DNC happening right now but avoiding MSM coverage, the nascent Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, and the incredible Clinton-Wasserman Schultz connection to a Pakistani national who has very likely been blackmailing the DNC and several Democrats personally.

Don't laugh at Soviet Pravda anymore. American media is equally corrupt.
layman
 
  -4  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 06:01 am
@Lash,
Another excerpt, eh?:

Quote:
Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year. Their work is intricate and continues at a kinetic pace as we speak. But its certain results so far are two, simply stated, and freighted with implications:

There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5 last year—not by the Russians, not by anyone else. Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak—a download executed locally with a memory key or a similarly portable data-storage device. In short, it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system....

Forensic investigations of documents made public two weeks prior to the July 5 leak by the person or entity known as Guccifer 2.0 show that they were fraudulent: Before Guccifer posted them they were adulterated by cutting and pasting them into a blank template that had Russian as its default language.

This article is based on an examination of the documents these forensic experts and intelligence analysts have produced, notably the key papers written over the past several weeks, as well as detailed interviews with many of those conducting investigations and now drawing conclusions from them.


Not a single cheese-eater here will read this article, because they don't want to see or hear what it says.

They will, however, quickly and glibly dismiss it as a "fake" article is they are ever forced to address it.

The experts were saying this as soon as the report became available:

0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  6  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 06:56 am
@Lash,
I had asked you a question on the GMO topic in Edgar's other thread. I'm still interested in what you have there.
Lash
 
  -4  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 07:06 am
@maporsche,
I offered three articles--one, including peer-reviewed scientific data in Reuters.
That hasn't evaporated; it's still sitting there.

The only reason I call out Monsanto is to warn people and to add my voice to those who want to hold them accountable for what they're doing to public health. You and others accuse me of having some weird political reason for hating Monsanto.

I've completely lost interest in what you or they eat. Read what I wrote previously if you like. This will be the last time I waste on the subject with you.
maporsche
 
  7  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 07:12 am
@Lash,
Lash wrote:
This will be the last time I waste on the subject with you.


One can only dream...
Below viewing threshold (view)
maporsche
 
  6  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 07:17 am
@Lash,
Ok. Thought about it. Thanks?
izzythepush
 
  3  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 07:28 am
Quote:
US retailer Walmart has apologised after a picture emerged of a gun cabinet in one of its stores beneath a sign reading "own the school year like a hero".
The retailer tweeted the display was "horrible" and "truly awful," and said it would investigate how it came to be.
The image has been widely shared on Reddit and Twitter, with many users questioning how it had happened.
In recent years, the US has seen a number of deadly school shootings.
Charles Crowson, a spokesman for Walmart, told the BBC: "What's seen in this photograph would never be acceptable in our stores.
"We regret this situation and are looking into how it could have happened."


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40879057
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  4  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 07:34 am
Quote:
Five transgender people in the US military have launched a legal bid to block a ban announced by President Trump on Twitter last month.
The anonymous plaintiffs from the army, air force and coast guard are suing Mr Trump and several officials.
They say thousands of transgender troops have declared themselves since the military said they could serve openly and now face uncertain futures.
Mr Trump said transgender people would "disrupt" the military.
However it is not yet clear whether formal steps to enforce the ban have yet been taken or how it will affect serving personnel.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40885278
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  5  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 07:55 am
Quote:
An inflatable chicken with a golden coiffure has appeared near the White House in protest at Donald Trump's "weak" and "ineffective" leadership.
The 30 ft (9m) tall bird, referred to as "Chicken Don", stands between the official residence of the US president and the famous Washington Monument.
Owner Taran Singh Brar said the prop portrays a president who is "afraid".
But some Twitter users were not impressed, with one dubbing the stunt "pathetic".
In a video posted on social media on Wednesday, activist and documentary maker Mr Brar said he hoped to "bring awareness" to what he said was a "bad and destabilising" US president.
"We are out here to criticise our president for being weak and ineffective as a leader," he said in the footage posted on Twitter, adding that Mr Trump also "seems afraid" to release his tax returns.
"He seems afraid to stand up to Putin and now he's playing a game of chicken with North Korea," Mr Brar said.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40886178
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  -2  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 08:54 am
@glitterbag,
glitterbag wrote:

As predictably as the earth turns on its axis once again you peevishly lash out over a simple statement. Apparently you are not always as amused by the natterings of the little people as you routinely proclaim. You have tried to make a federal case over a basic and all too readily verifiable fact. I am now forced to merely point out that you have a distasteful habit of larding up a non-explanation as if it actually has merit or intellectual weight. In DOD we informally called it baffaloney. You might remember that phrase, it was the less rude way of describing the utter nonsense that tends to spout out of the windbags who are insufferably impressed with their own delusions of cutting wit and laser sharp intellect.

I believe you are projecting your own peevishness here (and perhaps a few other things, as well). The simple statement of fact here was my post, a factual reply to your irrational characterization of an earlier one. to which you objected with such irritability. I'm bemused to read that you presume now to speak for "DOD". I was never too fond of the over-compensating bureaucrats who infested the place in such increasing numbers, and you have refreshed my memory of them.
emmett grogan
 
  7  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 08:57 am
@Lash,
Seth Rich, eh? That's a shameful post. Shame on you.
izzythepush
 
  6  
Thu 10 Aug, 2017 09:00 am
@emmett grogan,
Lash is a Trump supporter who likes to pretend to be a Sanders supporter. Most people aren't fooled.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.73 seconds on 11/27/2024 at 04:35:30