|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Trump Presidency | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 756 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
Cool. I always thought Otto wouldn’t have much approved of being quoted as saying that too, despite its very profound truth....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1427 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
The first applies to the republican obsession with diverting the discussion to Biden:
quote: Hunter Biden is a red herring non-issue, only brought up to muddy the impeachment process (repubicans, it sems, do not have any other defense) and
quote: More at link. Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
If one is to win at trial, such as might take place before the Senate, then it helps to frame events in the proper terms. Representative Jim Himes (D-CT) made several things absolutely clear yesterday on Meet the Press, among them that quid pro quo is the incorrect term for what took place. A quid pro quo is a mutually agreed upon exchange, and there was absolutely no quid pro quo. Trump has been right about this all along.
What Trump did is more accurately described as extortion, which is using threats to force some action, often paying money, but it could be anything of value. Trump held the threat of withholding military aid over Ukraine's head in order to force them into a publicly announced investigation of his political rival for his own political advantage in the 2020 election. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1427 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
What Trump did is more accurately described as extortion, which is using threats to force some action, often paying money, but it could be anything of value. Trump held the threat of withholding military aid over Ukraine's head in order to force them into a publicly announced investigation of his political rival for his own political advantage in the 2020 election. That's the obvious one that everyone has focused on. He was also asking a foreign government for assistance in his election, which is a crime according to federal election law. He has also blatantly done this with Russia and China. On TV.
... and there was absolutely no quid pro quo. Trump has been right about this all along. Trump is very good at revising the conversation by near truths. Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8534 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
Trump is very good at revising the conversation by near truths. Such a kind way of saying he is lying through his fucking teeth.Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 190 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
As quoted at Hullabaloo:
quote:Original source E.P.A. to Limit Science Used to Write Public Health Rules - The New York Times
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5949 Joined: Member Rating: 5.5 |
Wasn't sure where else to post this.
Volodymyr Zelensky earned a law degree and is listed as a "Ukrainian actor, comedian, screenwriter, film producer, director, economist and politician who is currently the 6th President of Ukraine since May 2019." Before actually becoming President he played a school teacher reluctantly catapulted into the office of the President on a TV series, (English title: "Servant of the People"):
quote: The show is currently being carried by Netflix in the USA: Watch Servant of the People | Netflix Edited by dwise1, : Minor grammatical correction
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Earlier today I added my thoughts to the comments section of the NYT article you linked to. The article isn't very clear about what it means to make the raw data available. If it means making public the actual names of people along with their information then that would have a chilling effect and this is awful.
But if anonymity is maintained (e.g., by referring to "patient 237" and such) then I'm in favor of it. Science is very complicated and involved today, and the more the raw data is reviewed and analyzed the more accurate the science should be. Part of the article said that the law would require the EPA to expend a great deal of effort on redactions, but it wasn't specific about what was being redacted. If the redacted material includes people's identities, meaning personal identification data is being passed around, then that greatly increases the possibility that the information could become public and this is, again, awful. It's also inconsistent with the right's paranoid attitudes about maintaining privacy and keeping the government out of their business. Speaking of scientific transparency, I watched a NYT video last night titled Guilty by Machine about breathalyzers. It was one episode of a weekly program called Weekly produced by the NYT that airs on Sunday nights on FX and is also available on Hulu. The companies who make breathalyzers don't want to reveal much about their technology for competitive reasons, and they're SLAPP happy. The programmers who analyzed one of the machine's code were legally not allowed to talk about their results or conclusions, and when the reporter produced a copy of their report one of the programmers said that he was legally required to request that they destroy it. The reporter said she wasn't going to destroy it, and that was followed by a segment where she described the report's content. Which was, of course, damning. Making matters worse, the police don't maintain the machines very well or provide adequate training. When pressed the companies say that their machines offer an approximation that can be affected by a host of variables, but the police and legal system have transformed breathalyzer results into gospel. I only offer this as an example of a scientific area that should have a lot more transparency. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Speaking of scientific transparency, I watched a NYT video last night titled Guilty by Machine about breathalyzers. It was one episode of a weekly program called Weekly produced by the NYT that airs on Sunday nights on FX and is also available on Hulu. The companies who make breathalyzers don't want to reveal much about their technology for competitive reasons, and they're SLAPP happy. The programmers who analyzed one of the machine's code were legally not allowed to talk about their results or conclusions, and when the reporter produced a copy of their report one of the programmers said that he was legally required to request that they destroy it. The reporter said she wasn't going to destroy it, and that was followed by a segment where she described the report's content. Which was, of course, damning. Making matters worse, the police don't maintain the machines very well or provide adequate training. When pressed the companies say that their machines offer an approximation that can be affected by a host of variables, but the police and legal system have transformed breathalyzer results into gospel. Determining the validity of breathalyzers is incredibly simple. Because you can measure the results by having a controlled group ingesting different amounts of alcohol, some with no alcohol, and seeing the results based on the amounts consumed along with their respective alcohol content. It doesn't get more measurable than that in order to determine how accurate it is. Now, polygraph machines.... that's a different story. That's junk science through and through. "Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0
|
Determining the validity of breathalyzers is incredibly simple. Because you can measure the results by having a controlled group ingesting different amounts of alcohol, some with no alcohol, and seeing the results based on the amounts consumed along with their respective alcohol content. "So, after work, whatcha say we go out and calibrate a breathalyzer?" Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Hyroglyphx writes:
That's exactly what the RCMP do when they train their members to use breathalyzers. Because you can measure the results by having a controlled group ingesting different amounts of alcohol, some with no alcohol, and seeing the results based on the amounts consumed along with their respective alcohol content. It doesn't get more measurable than that in order to determine how accurate it is. Edited by ringo, : Splling."If you can keep your head when all about you Are losing theirs and blaming it on you...." -- Rudyard Kipling
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 190 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Lost in the shuffle: China signs defence agreement with South Korea as US angers Seoul with demand for $5bn troop payment
quote:Trump's the best friend Russia and China ever had. Think of whar he could do if he was on our side! |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
quote: The audio available here I was disappointed in how weakly (at best) the HARDtalk host refuted some of the usual BS Trump talking points. Mainly, Ruddy's assertion that VP Bidden was wrong for calling for the removal of a Ukrainian prosecutor that was investigating corruption, when indeed there was very widespread call for the removal because of the prosecutor's lack of investigating corruption. Not a peep out of the HARDtalk host refuting that. Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Yeah, that was pretty weak. That wasn’t the regular Hardtalk host - I forget his name, but I have a feeling he would have challenged the fallacies and lies better.
Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
That wasn’t the regular Hardtalk host Hardtalk usually seems to give a pretty thorough grilling to the political guests, regardless of where the guest falls on the political spectrum. I had been wanting to hear a Trumpista get challenged, but this one was a dud. Bad time to put in the 2nd string host. This wasn't a real Hardtalk. Moose Edited by Minnemooseus, : Fairly substantial revision.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024