Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

Honestly, AA, you had far bigger problems growing up in Louisiana than frolicking in DDT.

[hack]

I don't know that it fully explains it anyways. Look at Wiz -- I doubt there was any DDT on that uncharted island he came from.

[AlabamAlum]

Honestly, AA, you had far bigger problems growing up in Louisiana than frolicking in DDT.

EVEN WITH MY PREEMPTIVE, YOU STILL RUN WITH THE SASS??

[Da Geezer]

Geezer- Seriously

1) Nunes is supposedly investigating possible ties between the Trump campaign/administration and Russia and also if illegal wiretaps were placed on him

2) Nunes receives 'new information' from an anonymous source, which all Republicans have said for months are untrustworthy

3) Nunes feels the first person who should be told about the new evidence is Trump himself

Can you explain why that makes perfect legal sense?

First, I'm not sure what "legal sense" actually is, but Nunes should have informed Schift (sp) first.

As to why go to the President, I don't know, but I can speculate. Most obviously running to the white house would be (1) to curry favor with Trump. But, if reports are true, the information came from an individual, and was only a small part of a bigger trove of alleged documents. What if (2) the individual wanted assurances from the President that he would not be prosecuted or fired? (3)What if delivery of the rest of the documentation was conditioned on am immunity agreement of some type and Nunes had to get the President's signature?

This is all the rankest form of speculation, almost exactly like the two and a half months of the meme we have seen about the Trump "conspiring" with the Russians to "hack the election". I don't think Peter King would have said what he said without something to base it on. And the actual news in this whole kerfuffle is (1) that other Trump aids (other than Flynn) were caught on surveillance. (2) They too were "unmasked". (3) The conversations were of no "foreign intelligence" value (meaning NSA) and (4) Some conversations were possibility between two foreigners who referenced an American.

I've tried to be responsive. Now, would you tell me why the Obama administration (in its last weeks) would allow the raw data collected by the NSA to be "shared" with 16 other intelligence agencies? That has never been US policy, ever as far as I can tell. Why at that point in time?

Could we come back to this later? I'm really interested in the current discussion about banks, environmental activism, and Talent being a tree- hugger.

[iam416]

EVEN WITH MY PREEMPTIVE, YOU STILL RUN WITH THE SASS??

Well, I mean, gargling DDT is just the tip of the iceberg in view of your fourth world genetics, upbringing and disposition. It's a little like the McCrary twins expecting to preempt sass by acknowledging they have a little acne on their foreheads.

[SeattleLionsFan]

It's amazing Geezer. If you are really interested in information, there's this thing called google that can provide all of the information ever known to man. You should check it out sometime.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/01/obama-expanding-nsa-powers/513041/

[Da Geezer]

It's amazing Geezer. If you are really interested in information, there's this thing called google that can provide all of the information ever known to man. You should check it out sometime.

So, your position is (from the article) "But while the changes may subject more Americans to warrantless surveillance, the last-minute timing of the announcement actually might have been designed to cut future privacy losses. Susan Hennessey, a Brookings fellow and the managing editor of Lawfare, says firming up the changes before Trump takes office makes it harder for the incoming president to encroach even further on civil liberties."

The first sentence is the most important. At best, this widespread "sharing" of NSA data is a preemptive strike to somehow prevent the next administration from encroaching even further on civil liberties? That's like killing someone to prevent their future murder. Certainly, even you can see that. You should google 12333 and find out what blanket powers the NSA has in terms of warrantless surveillance. Now, under the Obama orde,r all 17 agencies have access to warrantless surveillance.

But I do appreciate the link.

And, speaking of google, I'm getting better. It took me a while to read Talent's post where he was using abbreviations of various environment laws and organizations. I also googled "L50" and found out it is the dosage that kills half of the mammals (test group) it is given to. The same kind of deal precipitated the "ban" on saccharine. Unlike most Americans, I read the data on saccharine and continued to use it when I could get it. IMO, if the world were a just place, saccharine would be the cure for cancer.

The internet will never be my friend, but it is becoming an acquaintance.

[entropy]

sometimes one should just not try and create a positive...

============

George EatonVerified account @georgeeaton [ame="https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/844863098171277313"]8h8 hours ago[/ame]
Follow Following Unfollow Blocked Unblock Pending Cancel



A snapshot of London's magnificent diversity in those injured: French, Romanian, Korean, German, Polish, Irish, Chinese, US, Italian, Greek.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Geezer,
There is no need for a "position." Why something is done is a fact, not an opinion. Why may not know that answer, but it is not a position.

[crashcourse]

so what do the Koch's want--elimination of any national health plan --everyone purchase your own I suppose and hospitals having to eat all costs for any uninsured emergencies?

[Da Geezer]

Geezer,
There is no need for a "position." Why something is done is a fact, not an opinion. Why may not know that answer, but it is not a position.

Fair point. The Brookings fellow was the one that has a position that I presumed you agreed with. But her rationalization is what the article is about. She says that the community-wide dissemination of warrantless surveillance can be justified because a Trump administration might do even worse. That is Alice-in-Wonderland stuff. You can be 100% sure that a man will not be murdered in the future if you murder him today. That is exactly what she is saying.

Obama would have never made this move had Hillary won the election, and your article provides the best case rationalization. That doesn't make it fact.

And, I might add, the whole Nunes story is about surveillance after the election. I don't know if that is important or not, but it goes to my point that this was initiated after Trump won.

IMO, much of what has gone on in the last few months from progs and rinos has its origin in their absolute conviction that Hillary was going to win. That is the best explanation why Putin meddled in the election (credit Talent), and it's the best explanation of the riots, marches, and violence by the snowflakes. Things are just harder to take when they are unexpected.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Republicans cancel their vote.

Kochs win this round. Will Trump humble himself and bend the knee?

[Dr. Strangelove]

Trump was playing "Big Rig Driver" at the time they announced the vote was off. Got to honk the horn and everything.

[The Oracle]

We're sure he knew what was going on.

[hack]

Trump was playing "Big Rig Driver"

For a minute I was thinking you were talking about a song. Didn't think Trump would listen to country/western.