192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
blatham
 
  2  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 08:08 am
Marketing idea
"Green Meat"
hightor
 
  2  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 08:25 am
@blatham,
Quote:
"Green Meat"


Not after reading this — best news I've read in years!

Eat Less Red Meat, Scientists Said. Now Some Believe That Was Bad Advice.
nyt
blatham
 
  1  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 08:34 am
There's a rather wonderful piece up at the NY Times on Rachel Maddow. But this particular graph caught my attention because there is something oddly similar in this to the fashion choices made by another female genius I'm in love with.
Quote:
On TV, Maddow appears in slim black blazers over black shirts. She wears smoky eye shadow and subtly glossy lipstick, and her short hair is swept elegantly away from her forehead. The only tell that her business-casual femininity is a mirage created for television is that she has not modified her look for 11 years. It is a uniform she selected for work and steps into every day, so that she never has to make an aesthetic choice that can be picked apart by the commentariat and elevated above what she has to say. When the show is over, she wipes off her makeup, removes her contacts and changes into her civilian clothing.


That other female genius, Billy Eilish, dresses very differently. She wears wonderfully outrageous get-ups in both color and shape. Color-wise, it looks rather like a cat ate box of crayons and then puked all over her. The shape is always baggy. You have really only the roughest idea of what her body might be shaped like.

And though seemingly near opposites at first glance, for both women, this de-sexualization is is entirely purposeful. It is the work that's important for each of them.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 08:35 am
@hightor,
Just guess what brought that gag to mind.
hightor
 
  2  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 08:38 am
@blatham,
I should've known it couldn't have been coincidental!
blatham
 
  2  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 08:44 am
@hightor,
I am a tragically predictable fellow.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 09:06 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:

Quote:
I suspect the Clinton Campaign went through their Law firm to pay a former British intelligence officer, then living in Russia and working freelance, for the salacious Trump dossier, for a similar reason.

What's the "similar reason" here? Snood's question was about open contempt for lawfully issued subpoenas.


The "similar reason" is quite obviously, and as was plainly indicated in my text, the protections of legal counsel from testifying about matters affecting their clients. I wrote "suspect" because one cannot know for sure the inner motives of others.

Snood's question was about the ability of the Committee to use a subpoena to enforce testimony from Cabinet officials or legal counsel. I answered it accurately reflecting the applicable legal restraints.

Your assertion of "open contempt" ignores the legal issues involved.
blatham
 
  1  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 09:29 am
Big ******* Surprise
Quote:
Pompeo says State Dept. officials won’t show up for scheduled impeachment depositions this week
WP
snood
 
  2  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 09:32 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Big ******* Surprise
Quote:
Pompeo says State Dept. officials won’t show up for scheduled impeachment depositions this week
WP


And they called Obama “lawless”.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 09:33 am
Would people in the Trump administration seek the help of the Kremlin in doing damage to the reputations of key American institutions for political advantage?
Quote:
Barr personally asked foreign officials to aid inquiry into CIA, FBI activities in 2016
WP
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 09:44 am
Jesus. There have been over 74 thousand posts to this thread. If I had charged one dollar for each contribution I'd probably be close to breaking even.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 10:34 am
Quote:
Iran's judiciary says it has convicted three people of spying for the US, sentencing one of them to death, and another person of spying for the UK.

Spokesman Gholamhossein Esmaili said two men, Ali Nafariyeh and Mohammadali Babapour, had received 10-year prison sentences for working for the CIA.

Mohammad Amin Nasab was jailed for 10 years for aiding British intelligence.

Mr Esmaili said he would not identify the person sentenced to death because the verdict was subject to appeal.

It was not clear if any of those convicted were among 17 people who Iran's intelligence ministry said had been arrested for spying for the CIA earlier this year.

The ministry alleged they had been collecting information in nuclear and military facilities and in the private sector - allegations that US President Donald Trump dismissed as "totally false".

Mr Esmaili also confirmed on Tuesday that the Iranian authorities had arrested the British-Iranian anthropologist Kameel Ahmady.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-49891609
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  2  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 11:09 am
@georgeob1,
Thanks for your explanation. You know, I wasn't criticizing you, I just wasn't sure of your meaning. Do you think that, regardless of "the legal issues involved", simply dismissing lawfully issued subpoenas — stonewalling — should be a standard practice when members of an administration are suspected of wrongdoing?
blatham
 
  1  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 11:54 am
Goodness. Let's hope for that release.
Quote:
A veteran federal judge on Monday warned U.S. prosecutors either to charge former acting FBI director Andrew McCabe or to drop their investigation into whether he lied to investigators about an unauthorized media disclosure, saying their indecision was undermining the credibility of the Justice Department.
If a decision is not made, U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton of Washington, D.C., said at a hearing that he would order the Justice Department to release internal FBI documents related to McCabe’s firing by Nov. 15.
The extraordinary warning by Walton — a 2001 President George W. Bush appointee and former presiding judge of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court — marked the latest turbulence in an investigation that McCabe’s defenders say is a move by the Trump administration to punish the president’s perceived political enemies.
WP
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  3  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 12:34 pm
@hightor,
Eggs, salt, butter, now red meat. The health professionals change their minds on this information about every two years, which is why I eat whatever I want and don't pay much attention too them.
georgeob1
 
  0  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 01:16 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:

Thanks for your explanation. You know, I wasn't criticizing you, I just wasn't sure of your meaning. Do you think that, regardless of "the legal issues involved", simply dismissing lawfully issued subpoenas — stonewalling — should be a standard practice when members of an administration are suspected of wrongdoing?

Thanks to you as well. There are a number of "standard practices" recently developed of which I don't approve. One is the now two year ongoing and relentless campaign by the Democrat Congressional leadership to find SOME basis on which to impeach the President - in effect a prosecution in which, in the eyes of its protagonists, the outcome is already known, and only the specific charges remain to be determined. Another is the complete refusal of Democrats in the Congress to join with Republicans in addressing key current national issues ranging from immigration to energy policy and infrastructure development. Republicans here aren't much better, and as a result our Legislature is seriously dysfunctional.

I do find the ongoing whistleblower controversy to be the result of a contrived and well-coordinated campaign likely based on leaks within the bureaucracies, and not the spontaneous act of a whistleblower acting alone. Indeed his/her published report/complaint reeks of legal and political content and preparation. Overall it appears to involve efforts similar to those that defined the two year Mueller Investigation which went to great lengths in efforts to find collusion with Russian efforts to affect our election, but only to the extent they involved Trump. Strangely it focused not at all on the part of the Clinton Campaign, which actively funded and assisted in the funding and dissemination of the Russian sourced "dossier" on Trump, which was a key foundation element in the Mueller investigation.

Finally the overwrought indignation of the Democrats over all things Trump is beginning to look a little silly compared to stuff now emerging from among the Democrat contenders. I believe the contrast there is beginning to be fairly widely noted by many people. Not a good indicator.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 01:24 pm
@RABEL222,
Deep fried gum boots. Maybe fine after all.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  3  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 01:31 pm
@RABEL222,
And Coffee. Don't forget coffee.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  5  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 01:35 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Jesus. There have been over 74 thousand posts to this thread. If I had charged one dollar for each contribution I'd probably be close to breaking even.

If you'd charged one dollar per post we wouldn't have most of the BS posts on here.
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Tue 1 Oct, 2019 02:44 pm
As usual Vox has a real good explainer for Ukraine/Whistleblower complaint. It is long, but very clear cut and simple and to the point. My kind of reading.

Everything we know so far suggests the whistleblower’s account was right on target.
0 Replies
 
 

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 0.46 seconds on 09/16/2024 at 05:36:38