Trump

[notaterran]

I would rather have an Einstein flying the plane, than a Trump flying it.

I'd rather have Einstein's cadaver flying the plane instead of Trump. I guess the autopilot will have to do.

[fiksal]

having spent 15 years building Rolls Royce Aero engines -

That sounds like a cool job

[Retiredman]

I would rather have an Einstein flying the plane, than a Trump flying it.

I'd rather have Einstein's cadaver flying the plane instead of Trump. I guess the autopilot will have to do.

Wouldn't the smell be pretty bad? Then of course I don't think Einstein corpse would smell good either.

[BugMeister]

having spent 15 years building Rolls Royce Aero engines -

That sounds like a cool job

the CEO of the company I worked for was on Sir Frank Whittle's team for the original jet engine design..

and yes, fiks - working to tolerances of 1/10,000th of an inch does bring a great deal of satisfaction..
and knowing that your manufactured parts will be in the air, carrying passengers within 2 weeks meant (- and still does..) very strict discipline at all times..
very stressful, but very rewarding..
- something that the idiot Don Trump couldn't possibly ever conceive of..

- that, and 25 years working for the Inland Revenue, convinces me that Trump is totally unfit for office..

[Grim Lock]

So Trump had a little twitter explosion this weekend, there's too much insanity there to pick any one of them specificly. But really if one still looks up and or respects this man, You are part of the problem not the solution. That man is beyond defense.

[BugMeister]

Putin's rogue oligarchs set out to deliberately make fools of the USA, and to directly weaken fundamental Western democratic principles..
fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your point of view..) they succeeded only in making a complete ass of the President and his family..
leaving White House operatives and associates of the President with egg all over their faces - the Republican Party has been shaken to its very foundations,,

- BUT, the American people are NOT stupid, they can clearly see what is going on - they are being kept informed of the truth..
- and that, my friends, is something to be justly proud of..

- more power to the USA..!!

[Bishop149]

I'm currently listening to the podcast "Bagman" by Rachel Maddow for MSNBC

It's about Nixon's VP Spiro Agnew and the largely untold story of the investigation against him.
A politician who made a name for himself and built a strong base of popular support by aggressively and vitriolically attacking his opponents both political and (especially) within the media. He had also spent his entire political career running a criminal operation, taking cash bribes for the awarding of government contracts at the local, state and finally federal level.
When threatened with exposure he turned all of his political power and campaign tactics towards attacking and discrediting the investigation against him branding it a "Witch hunt".

Sound at all familiar?

The quote that stuck with me the most so far from one of the prosecutors
"Had we been prosecuting John Smith I was experienced enough as a prosecutor to know we had a good case, watertight, open and shut. But we weren't prosecuting John Smith"
Endlessly depressing the degree to which such people are beyond the law. . . . . Spoiler (but not really): Despite overwhelming evidence of guilt he largely gets away with it. . . . convicted of a single minor felony charge and punishment that amounts to slap on the wrist
Its a good story, worth listening to but I'm not a fan of the podcasts chosen format. It's far too American for my taste and seems to assume the listener only has a 2 minute attention span. It keeps foreshadowing and repeating things, meaning only about 60% of each episode is new information.

[fiksal]

having spent 15 years building Rolls Royce Aero engines -

That sounds like a cool job

the CEO of the company I worked for was on Sir Frank Whittle's team for the original jet engine design..

and yes, fiks - working to tolerances of 1/10,000th of an inch does bring a great deal of satisfaction..
and knowing that your manufactured parts will be in the air, carrying passengers within 2 weeks meant (- and still does..) very strict discipline at all times..
very stressful, but very rewarding..

Sounds like would be fun chat over some beers!

[Morkonan]

I'm currently listening to the podcast "Bagman" by Rachel Maddow for MSNBC......Its a good story, worth listening to...

With much respect for you, I doubt it's "worth listening to." Maddow is a far-left political hack. There is virtually no chance of anything in terms of political commentary she provides being unbiased at all. Zero, in my opinion. Everything, as far as her commentary is concerned, has some way it can be demonstrated to be the ultimate evil evidence that everyone on teh Earfh has been waiting for in order to finally condemn, punish, and emerge victorious over the radical and heinous tyranny of the Right. We are so lucky to have such a benevolent savior willing to sacrifice her time and immense, bulbous, intellect to gift us with such thoughts...

Yeah, it's that bad, in my opinion. It's even further Left than Bill O' Reilly on Fox "News" is Right.

But, that's just like my opinion an' stuff...

[Bishop149]

I'm currently listening to the podcast "Bagman" by Rachel Maddow for MSNBC......Its a good story, worth listening to...

With much respect for you, I doubt it's "worth listening to." Maddow is a far-left political hack. There is virtually no chance of anything in terms of political commentary she provides being unbiased at all. Zero, in my opinion.

I’m aware that many of those on the right view her in that regard, which I why I was very up front about who produced it.

The only bias here is her choice of timing with the very obvious parallels to the man who is the subject of this thread.
I think said the parallels are GLARING (far better than any parallel drawn to Nixon) but those of a different political bent might form a different opinion, which is why they should look into it.

The rest is merely an accounting of history, everything talked about is a matter of public record. This was the Nixon White House so as we’re all well aware it was all on tape, even the deepest darkest “private” conversations.
They damn themselves with their own words.

Edit: BTW the “heroes “ of this story, all Republicans.
Most especially George Bell the state AG who just absorbed all the considerable political pressure applied to shut down the investigation not allowing one iota of it to impact his team.

[Morkonan]

I’m aware that many of those on the right view her in that regard, which I why I was very up front about who produced it...

I'm not exactly on "the Right." I'll criticize anyone who has a history of being horribly biased.

The only bias here is her choice of timing with the very obvious parallels to the man who is the subject of this thread.

It's all over the place. Documentaries about Nixon, replays of "All the President's Men," etc, etc. It's "in the mind of the public" both due to circumstances (Trump...) and because it's being continually fed by those interested in seeing Trump gone.

...The rest is merely an accounting of history, everything talked about is a matter of public record.

If you're Airbus and I'm Boeing and you announce you're about to have the first commercial air flight of your new passenger liner, Imma gonna be a TV sponsor that month for every aircraft disaster movie ever made...

...Most especially George Bell the state AG who just absorbed all the considerable political pressure applied to shut down the investigation not allowing one iota of it to impact his team.

There was huge pushback from Congressional Republicans during the early days of the investigation. It wasn't until things were coming to a head and then it became known that there were "tapes" that things started to change. And, once the tapes were heard, things changed quickly. Even so, there were some holdouts for awhile.

The similarities between Republicans that align with Trump making all the claims of "witchhunt" are pretty deep. The only question really is what is going to happen after the Mueller report. IF there's enough there, there might be some holdovers that switch. But, to be honest, I don't think the possibility of any immediate action being taken is very high. And, it may be that nothing is ever done. So, a "politician" benefiting from being on Trump's side at the moment is not going to have any reason to withdraw their support.

And, that could keep the Mueller report from getting out, too - Why air a bunch of disgusting and nasty illegal stuff that would force you to have to publicly change your position, risking loss of a very enthusiastic base, if you don't have to? So... don't. If it ever gets released fully, it may not be until after Trump's tenure and then nobody is really going to give a crap. :/

[BugMeister]

- in theory, you don't actually need the Mueller report..

Trump should immediately be indicted for his transgressions, lies, manipulations and cheating while in the office of the Presidency..
Those Replicants responsible, should be censured for allowing his candidacy in the first place - they knew what they were getting..
Putin's mafia continues to suck money from the US economy, via a multitude of money-laundering exploits - enabled by gangster oligarchs..

- in the real world..

[Morkonan]

- in theory, you don't actually need the Mueller report..

Trump should immediately be indicted for his transgressions, lies, manipulations and cheating while in the office of the Presidency..
Those Replicants responsible, should be censured for allowing his candidacy in the first place - they knew what they were getting..
Putin's mafia continues to suck money from the US economy, via a multitude of money-laundering exploits - enabled by gangster oligarchs..

- in the real world..

The Constitution requires the burden of "Treason, Bribery or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors." And, those have been interpreted to be ones conducted during one's serving term in office. To have a foundation for that, one has to have evidence. It doesn't have to necessarily be evidence worthy of criminal prosecution, but it has to meet the standard of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors." That also includes "Treason" and "Bribery" too, though.... "Treason" has a particularly nasty criminal penalty associated with it that is No Joke ™. It's difficult to prove when not in times of general war, though.

[BugMeister]

With much respect for you, I doubt it's "worth listening to." Maddow is a far-left political hack. There is virtually no chance of anything in terms of political commentary she provides being unbiased at all. Zero, in my opinion. Everything, as far as her commentary is concerned, has some way it can be demonstrated to be the ultimate evil evidence that everyone on teh Earfh has been waiting for in order to finally condemn, punish, and emerge victorious over the radical and heinous tyranny of the Right. We are so lucky to have such a benevolent savior willing to sacrifice her time and immense, bulbous, intellect to gift us with such thoughts...

Yeah, it's that bad, in my opinion. It's even further Left than Bill O' Reilly on Fox "News" is Right.

But, that's just like my opinion an' stuff...

you're entitled to your opinion, natch - though you show little respect for objective critical analysis..
even while you are willing to blacken the reputation of one of USA's finest journalists, ( - in the opinion of millions..)

- the facts speak for themselves - shooting the messenger is not the solution..
- you are likely compounding the problem by attempting to belittle the search for the unvarnished truth..

- the problem, by the way - is Donald Trump's dangerous stranglehold on the extreme right-wing of the Republican Party, and their racist and religious intolerance..
- not the press..

[Morkonan]

With much respect for you, I doubt it's "worth listening to." Maddow is a far-left political hack. There is virtually no chance of anything in terms of political commentary she provides being unbiased at all. Zero, in my opinion. Everything, as far as her commentary is concerned, has some way it can be demonstrated to be the ultimate evil evidence that everyone on teh Earfh has been waiting for in order to finally condemn, punish, and emerge victorious over the radical and heinous tyranny of the Right. We are so lucky to have such a benevolent savior willing to sacrifice her time and immense, bulbous, intellect to gift us with such thoughts...

Yeah, it's that bad, in my opinion. It's even further Left than Bill O' Reilly on Fox "News" is Right.

But, that's just like my opinion an' stuff...

you're entitled to your opinion, natch - though you show little respect for objective critical analysis..
even while you are willing to blacken the reputation of one of USA's finest journalists, ( - in the opinion of millions..)

Then, millions of people are wrong because she's not a journalist. Wiki: Rachel Maddow

You understand the difference between a "political commentator" and "journalist," right? Maybe not?

- the facts speak for themselves - shooting the messenger is not the solution..

I refuse to define her or anyone else with such biased points of view as a "Messenger." So, I'm not "shooting" anyone. She's probably a fine person, good friend to her friends, etc, etc.. I just think she pushes her own bias far to much to be a reliable source of information or insightful discourse.

- you are likely compounding the problem by attempting to belittle the search for the unvarnished truth..

Uh... You're the one who has mistakenly called her a "journalist," not me. You're doing the same thing that FoxNews fans do when claiming Hannity is a "journalist." It seems to me that you are most definitely "part of the problem" because you don't have a dictionary.

- the problem, by the way - is Donald Trump's dangerous stranglehold on the extreme right-wing of the Republican Party, and their racist and religious intolerance..

That's... a very unintuitive point of view.

The problem isn't Trump's "dangerous stranglehold on the extreme right-wing of the Republican Party".. The real problem is that such extreme elements exist in ANY Party and that they prefer their particular dementia instead of "reality." Trump wouldn't have the power of a "stranglehold" over any extreme elements of any Party if those elements did not exist.

- not the press..

When you reference a source from "The Press" then we can talk about The Press. Otherwise, if you insist on posting "political commentary" from "non-journalists" that obviously are pushing their own "extreme or biased political views" then you are actually doing nothing more than helping to perpetuate bias and extremism. Congrats on joining "The Problem."

By the way, everyone can and should have their own opinion about things. People need to consume information and form opinions about it. But, the more skewed the source of information, the more likely it is that those opinions formed from it will be inaccurate. So, it's often necessary to actually have "discourse" and to listen to the opinions of others who have their own points of view. I heartily approve of that sort of thing. What I don't approve of is the blind acceptance of an opinion as "fact," thought of as being without the need for further consideration, from a source that is obviously biased.

Maddow is welcome to her "opinion." It may even be possible she could have some interesting insights from her point of view. But, it's "political commentary" and it is not "journalism" nor can anyone be rationally expected to blindly receive it as fact or truth without bias.

[Bishop149]

Then, millions of people are wrong because she's not a journalist. Wiki: Rachel Maddow

You understand the difference between a "political commentator" and "journalist," right? Maybe not?

It is possible to be both you know.

What she (and her team) have done with the podcast to which I was referring is undoubtably journalism, and really rather good investigative journalism at that.
They have gone and conducted interviews with all the key players on both sides of the case.
They have gone through all the legal and police records.
They have listened to and transcribed many of hours of previously brushed over (not about Watergate) Nixon tapes.
They have gone to the repositories where the politicians in question filed their official correspondences and dug through them all.
They have then cross corroborates these various sources with each other.
And finally they have built a story out of all that data and published it.
Not journalism you say? . . . . what is exactly then?

Look, everyone in the media is biased and some peoples bias (such as Maddow's) is extremely obvious*. This is not a basis to discount everything they say, it is a reason to check the veracity of what they say for yourself.
There is a substantial difference between the likes of Tucker Carlson spouting random BS that can usually be cut through by spending all of 10s on Google, and a commentator such Maddow (mostly judging by the podcast, haven't seen THAT much more of her) saying here's what I think, here's why I think it and here is where I sourced my information so you can go look.
Both may be equally biased, but otherwise are apples and pears

Finally, a quick google reveals Rachel Maddow to be worth $20M. She is therefore unlikely to be "far-left", if she was then she would consider her own wealth to be immoral. In that Wikipedia entry she described her own politics as ". . . undoubtedly liberal, which means that I'm in almost total agreement with the Eisenhower-era Republican party platform", which from what I've seen her espouse sounds almost exactly right.
In the UK we would describe such a political position as "Conservative".


*BTW the people you want to be scared of are those who appear unbiased, those are the people more actively trying to deceive you.

[Morkonan]

Then, millions of people are wrong because she's not a journalist. Wiki: Rachel Maddow

You understand the difference between a "political commentator" and "journalist," right? Maybe not?

It is possible to be both you know.

"But, he's not a murderer! He only killed like.. OK, maybe murdered like ten people. And, then there's all those puppies he strangled. But, he's a good guy! You should absolutely let him baby-sit for you!"

It is "possible." But, when a "journalist" gets slammed for losing their objectivity and is shown to have produced something false, purposefully misleading, very biased, then their career as a "jounalist" is effectively over. It's done with. No matter what they've done of any worthy credit is gone from history, forever tainted because they got caught lying or giving false presentations... Just once.

And, I'm supposed to accept that Maddow has, despite her past of just shoveling out biased far-left tripe, produced something worth of journalistic excellence because there's a youtube clip of it? Nope, sorry, I already have enough bridges and plenty of beachfront property in North Dakota.

She's going to have to produce evidence of live extraterrestrial visitors, preferably sitting in a chair and explaining to humanity why they are here, before I can consider she may have something worthy to say that could possibly, actually, be unbiased. Even then, she'll claim that the aliens live in a perfect communist society and that's how all intelligent civilizations eventually conduct themselves... Even if E.T. is standing there screaming about the perfect oligarchy with a slave-driven economy that its civilization has established.

What she (and her team) have done with the podcast to which I was referring is undoubtably journalism, and really rather good investigative journalism at that.

Or, political theater?

Hey, I can't claim to have any true knowledge of it. So, you could be right! Somewhere, she could have flipped over a new leaf and gone digging and found something of worth that's unbiased and factual.

But, seriously? In this climate?

The "Southpark Junior Detectives" couldn't help but stumble blindly over anything in this current "Trump Era" without turning up something controversial and potentially illegal. You're effectively telling me she may have discovered "dark" by turning off the lights.

They have ...(done stuff) <sic>

OK, in once sentence, what did Maddow uncover with her investigative journalism? Seriously - I want to know so I can figure out what it is you're so fired up about.

..Finally, a quick google reveals Rachel Maddow to be worth $20M. She is therefore unlikely to be "far-left", if she was then she would consider her own wealth to be immoral.

The "Far Left" is chock-full of deep pockets and old money. It's no different in that way than the "Far Right." Heck, in this environment, the "Far Right" is probably made up of poorer, more disadvantaged, people than the "Far Left." It's all a shell game. The Far Left appeals to "The Worker" just as a target of opportunity. That's it. Any far-leading political idealism is just a hook. Sure, some gobble it down, line and sinker, but it's still just a hook to gain power and recognition. There is no intention to move beyond the "Vanguard" phase for the powers behind the "Far Left." Zero... (IMO)

...*BTW the people you want to be scared of are those who appear unbiased, those are the people more actively trying to deceive you.

I'd say rather that those who make insistent claims of being unbiased are more worrying than those who don't have to make such claims. But, in today's news media environment, coupled with the degree of emotional energy and outrage poured in by all sides, people who truly want an unbiased presentation of the facts with unbiased interpretation of their significance don't really have anywhere to go. They'll have to consume the data and get enough information for themselves to come to an unbiased decision... IF they're even capable of doing that these days.

My unbiased decision so far is "Trump is bad for us." That's as concise as I can get right now.

[RegisterMe]

So Mueller's report has been handed in to the Justice Department. I guess we have to wait and see what Barr does with it.

[Masterbagger]

I am curious to see what the democrats will do if the mueller report doesn't show what they have been rabidly accusing President Trump of for years to be true. I don't expect apologies. I expect them to demand more frivolous investigations so they can keep the complicit media channels buzzing with headlines about all the things President Trump is accused of.

[BugMeister]

- what Kushner and Trump Org have been up to is hardly what one would describe as "frivolous"..
- this circus contains more than just clowns - sneezing while on a high-wire could just prove fatal..